HAMMERSMITH & FULHAM COUNCIL
hammersmith flyunder feasibility study
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 1
Leader’s foreword ...................................... 3
Chapter 1
Champions summary .................. 5
Key findings and
recommendations .......................... 9
Chapter 2
Introduction ........................................ 1 1
Chapter 3
Local opinion ..................................... 1 5
Borough letters ............................... 2 5
Chapter 4
Option comparison ..................... 2 9
Funding .................................................... 4 3
Chapter 5
Summary ................................................ 4 7
Conclusions ......................................... 4 9
Principal author Nicholas Ruxton-Boyle
Contributing authors Neale Stevenson Thomas Cardis Rob Mansfield
TfL sponsor Tim Thomas
Proof reading By:design
Design By:design
Photos Dean Wendelborn
Artists impressions West London Link Design
Photomontage Hayes Davidson
3D mapping zmapping
Printing Hammerprint
Flyunder taskForceNeale Stevenson Flyunder Champion
Nicholas Ruxton-Boyle Thomas Cardis H&F Council
Jasper denBoeft Greater London Authority
Geoff Burrage James McCool Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea
Mark Frost London Borough of Hounslow
Ben Fryer London Borough of Richmond
David Condon Tim Thomas Transport for London
Tom Ryland Allan Baird West London Link Design
Patricia Bench Arun Sondhi Hammersmith BID
Peter Wright Halcrow
Illustrative view looking west at potential new commercial quarter around the ‘Ark’.
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 3
Since the emergency closure in December 2011, of Hammersmith’s ugly concrete flyover and the ensuing traffic chaos which affected swathes of west London, serious questions have been asked about the viability of the flyover.
This elevated concrete monster has divided our town centre for decades, magnifying traffic noise and polluting our air in the process. It scythes through the heart of Hammersmith like our very own Berlin Wall, creating an imposing physical barrier that gobbles up space, blocks light and cuts residents and visitors off from the river while limiting business and trade.
However, the escalating costs of maintenance and increased risk of failure focused minds on the alternatives to this decaying 50-year-old structure and, bizarrely, this divisive structure has had a unifying effect on West Londoners.
Local architects West London Link Design presented their ideas for a replacement tunnel, which could unleash a ‘chain of opportunities’ along the A4. This tunnel combined with
overwhelming public support for a ‘flyunder’, led the council to commission this feasibility study.
The report explores the benefits and challenges related to various tunnel options. World-renowned tunnel experts Halcrow, who were involved in the Channel Tunnel, tested the ground conditions and council transport planners have worked closely with Transport for London (TfL) officials and neighbouring boroughs to start the process of examining the options.
An independent ‘Flyunder Champion’ - Neale Stevenson - was appointed to bring all of the various stakeholders, who are interested in burying the Hammersmith Flyover, together. Local residents were at the heart of the debate with a series of stakeholder meetings - including a major flyunder summit and transport select committee informing our thinking.
The key findings show a tunnel replacement could take just three years to construct and could release up to a £1billion worth of former highway land and under-developed sites in the town centre to help pay for the works.
The alternatives vary from a one-mile tunnel to a 2.5-mile tunnel, which is likely to cost between £218million and £1.7billion. The shortest option
would involve digging a ‘cut and cover’ tunnel 15 metres beneath the surface, while the longer tunnel would involve using boring machines.
There is little doubt that some form of a tunnel would improve the quality of life for thousands of west Londoners and be a game changer for Hammersmith town centre. Meanwhile, traffic flows in and out of London would also be improved.
A new flyunder would enable Hammersmith’s great divider to be torn down and reconnect our town centre with the river, making our once beautiful town an even more attractive place to visit or do business.
This report is not an end point. It is a beginning. This is the council’s response to The Mayor of London’s Roads Task Force and it is now mainly for TfL, who own and manage the A4, to decide how to take the project forward.
Cllr Nicholas Botterill Leader Hammersmith & Fulham Council
LeADeR’S FoRWARDGoing underground - a vision for an a4 ‘flyunder’
Illustrative view looking south from Lyric Square.
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 5
BackgroundAt the request of H&F Council I have been overseeing a short study into the feasibility of replacing the Hammersmith Flyover with a tunnel. Professional leadership has come from Nicholas Ruxton-Boyle, the
H&F Transport and Development Manager, whose contribution has been superb.
The forced closure of the flyover for repair work in 2011 started a public debate on the options for replacement, which in turn excited the council’s ambition for the potential environmental improvement of central Hammersmith. The debate is as lively as ever as we endure a second phase of repair work.
Public support for the idea in principle was stunning, with 89 per cent of those consulted in local forums voicing their support. Interest in a better quality environment and an improved town centre and river access were highlighted as positives outcomes. Clearly there were concerns - most importantly the disruption caused by the build - but also in ensuring that any associated development was balanced.
CHAMPIoN’S SUMMARY
The bottom line is that there are feasible options to
replace the flyover with a tunnel - long or short.
We can prove to Transport for London that it can
be done. Technical reports suggest these ideas can be
executed, as planners outline a range of development
options that could help finance the project. We look
forward to hearing the Mayor of London’s response.
It is now down to the council, local residents and other
stakeholders to work with TfL to establish the optimal
solution - which will be the most acceptable trade-off
between cost and disruption and improvements to the
environmental and cultural life of the borough. I would
suggest that all of the options significantly enhance
Hammersmith Town Centre - while the most ambitious
transforms it.
6 HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study
The optionsConsultation with the public, stakeholders and technical experts steered us to looking at both a short like-for-like replacement for the flyover, and a longer, more ambitious route. We tested two longer versions, each extending from Sutton Court Road in the west to either North end Road or earl’s Court Road in the east. In each instance we also tested the impact of junctions allowing traffic to join or leave the A4 rather than continue for the whole length of the tunnel.
CostsCosts range (depending on whether junctions are included) from approximately £200m for the short ‘cut and cover’ option to just under £2bn for the longer bored tunnels.
Impact on traffic flowData shows that half of the traffic travelling east on the A4 past the Hogarth roundabout in Chiswick, turns off before it reaches earl’s Court. This suggests that junctions at Shepherd’s Bush Road/Fulham Palace Road and North end Road might be needed to ensure that the new tunnel attracts enough traffic and doesn’t simply add to congestion on the existing local road network. Such junctions are, however, difficult to site in the
narrow network of the existing roads, and costs would be significantly higher.
A new HammersmithWhile earlier ideas of tunnelling the A4 through Hammersmith had focused on development opportunities along the Great West Road/Talgarth Road strip, master planning suggests that any redevelopment should be focused on the area currently in the shadow of the flyover. The master planning exercise suggests a radically improved town centre. The focal point would undoubtedly create a new cultural sector - with the Lyric Theatre linked to the Apollo, adjoining a new public space around St Paul’s Church - all linked to the river. Removing the flyover would release approximately 360,000sqm of residential and commercial space.
Ranking the choices - questions to resolveThe disruption caused by a tunnel’s construction is broadly similar for both the long and short tunnels. The only difference is that the disruption associated with the short route is heavily focused on the already busy Hammersmith town centre.
Therefore, decisions boil down to how well they each satisfy the primary objective of reinventing the town centre and how much they will cost.
As the long tunnel will only attract enough traffic if it has junctions - it is worth testing the public appetite to include junctions. However, we see the economic and environmental costs as considerable.
The short tunnel has the advantage of being a decision for Hammersmith & Fulham Council and TfL, without the need to consult with other boroughs.
However, the full realisation of a transformed town centre would need further detailed research on local traffic flows and a plan to ease the flow on the Hammersmith gyratory. our work suggests a north-south tunnel would not be the most efficient way to achieve this solution.
There may be a case for taking both long and short tunnel options further, with H&F Council and TfL working together on the concept for a short route, and with TfL exploring the strategic potential of the longer route. The work we have done to date has been greatly helped by close co-operation with our neighbouring boroughs. It may well be that under TfL sponsorship, the long route can be assessed in terms of how it also affects Hounslow’s ambitions for the A4 as it goes west, and how Kensington and Chelsea wish to resolve the north/south isues that affect the earl’s Court one-way system.
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 7
While it was not in the remit of this study to recommend a specific solution, we have shown through public engagement that all options are technically feasible and displayed the relative affordability of each. We have also indicated what further work is needed and recommend that H&F Council and TfL work together to explore how this can be achieved.
The lower cost estimates are likely to be seen as affordable when set against the value of the land, released through development. The public will, however, have to be comfortable with three years of disruption to the A4 and the local road network as the tunnel is built, and be satisfied that this is an acceptable reality for their substantial long term gain.
We can show a path to a transformed Hammersmith town centre, with new public areas, a stronger cultural identity, new residential space in the heart of the town and an enhanced business and commercial offering. The environmental benefit of tunnelling and removing the flyover is compelling. In addition the tunnel would leave TfL with a more valuable asset, offering greater control on repair and maintenance budgets.
I would like to thank Halcrow for their expert advice, the planners for their input, the neighbouring boroughs for their support and
engagement and for the very constructive support offered by TfL. Most impressive, however, has been the engagement of the public in Hammersmith, who have shown strong support, detailed knowledge and have offered constructive criticism.
Local residents clearly want rid of this 1960s eyesore and to be able to reclaim their town centre. I believe they hold the key to how quickly this idea is adopted. If the public continue with their strong vocal support, supporting the concept of a flyunder will be an essential part of every candidate’s manifesto at the next Mayoral election, fast-tracking the adoption of the flyunder scheme. The future really is in the hands of Hammersmith residents and businesses.
Neale Stevenson Independent Flyunder Champion
Illustrative view looking east from Furnivall Gardens.
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 9
10 key findingsThese ten key findings are the result of the four elements of the feasibility study; engagement, traffic, geotechnical and masterplanning. It is recognised that further work is required to refine the estimates, approximations and assumptions made to allow the feasibility study to report:
There is a very high level of local support for burying the flyover;
There is sub-regional support for tunnelling the A4;
There are no known subterranean showstoppers;
The longer the tunnel, the more construction lorries will be needed. However, this can be significantly reduced if the river is used;
The longer the tunnel, the higher the construction cost will be. With the shorter option, the possibility of self-financing the scheme through releasing developable land in Hammersmith town centre is attractive;
The longer the tunnel, the more geographically spread out the 18 months of surface disruption would be during the three-year construction period;
Achieving a new Hammersmith town centre benefits from both the removal of the flyover and steps to address the Hammersmith Gyratory;
There is a high level of traffic dispersion along the A4 corridor between Chiswick and earl’s Court;
Significant environmental and economic issues could arise by linking a main tunnel to north-south routes; and
Both tunnel lengths have positive and negative issues meaning that further local and strategic work should be undertaken.
10 recommendationsThese ten recommendations are for TfL to consider as the road authority for the A4, the strategic traffic authority for London and the transport authority for London. They are also made to the membership of the flyunder taskforce recognising the sub-regional influence of the project and the wider implications beyond transport.
TfL endorses the vision set out in this feasibility study;
Terms of reference of a new strategic taskforce are established;
Strategic aspirations and concerns are sought;
A long term plan for the A4 corridor is developed;
An appraisal framework is established to fully evaluate large scale road investment;
River transport of tunnel dig spoil is investigated;
Traffic modelling is undertaken to explore the opportunities offered by the longer tunnel alignments;
The Hammersmith town centre masterplan is refined;
A surface road network is developed and tested to support the masterplan; and
Further geo-technical work is undertaken in order to improve confidence in the feasibility results.
KeY FINDINGS AND ReCoMMeNDATIoNS
The vision and direction for London’s streets and roadsRoads Task ForceExecutive summary
Delivering the vision for London's streets and roads
Transport for London’s response to the Roads Task Force
July 2013
Transport for London
MAYOR OF LONDON
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 1 1
INTRoDUCTIoN
IntroductionThe Road Task Force (RTF) was set up by the Mayor of London in 2012 to consider the future challenges facing London’s roads and streets. It is an independent body, which brought together a wide range of interests and expertise. Its report, published in July 2013, sets out a new vision for London’s roads.
Transport for London (TfL) published their response to the RTF at the same time and sets out the approach TfL, as the strategic highway authority for London, will take to implement its recommendations.
This report is published as the London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham’s response to both the RTF and TfL’s response to the RTF. The report concentrates on the opportunities identified in both documents for the A4 corridor in West London.
The RTF establishes a clear and compelling agenda for change in London. It identifies that while progress has been made in recent years, there are three pressing, and interrelated, challenges ahead:
• Tackling congestion by improving the efficient use of the network;
• Providing better and safer public spaces and streets; and
• Accommodating growing demands for more walking, cycling and public transport.
A4 corridorThe following text is taken directly from the RTF report of which the Great West Road (A4) was one of the case studies.
“The A4 is a major arterial road in west London carrying high volumes of traffic (more than 90,000 vehicles a day) between the M4 and central London.
Between Chiswick Roundabout and Hammersmith, the road causes severance and crossing opportunities are limited to subways. At Hammersmith, a flyover separates the arterial motorised traffic from the gyratory and town centre below. The flyover is visually intrusive and the high levels of motorised traffic generate noise and air pollution along the corridor. In the short term, further roll out of the split cycle offset optimisation technique (SCOOT) will improve journey time reliability, and improving subway conditions (the main crossing opportunities along the corridor) will help increase pedestrian safety and security.
However, to exploit the potential new surface developments and make greater use of Hammersmith’s established transport hub, longer-term proposals for providing alternative tunnelled routes for through traffic should be explored. This would have transformative effects on the town centre, greatly improving the quality of life for its residents, and reducing severance of communities along the corridor.
Proposed street type: Arterial”
TfL, in its response to the RTF and in particular to the concept of tunnelling, states:
“London does not have the wide boulevards of Paris or the extensive grid system of New York at its disposal to reallocate capacity to or from. And it’s clear that the public acceptability of any enhancements to the capability of London’s road network - including the creation of new facilities such as tunnels or underpasses to reduce the social and environmental impact of road traffic - will depend on their being tangible community and business benefits from such enhancements.
West London Link Design in association with the Halcrow Group and Hammersmith BID
A TUNNEL TO REPLACE THE HAMMERSMITH FLYOVER:
A CHAIN OF OPPORTUNITIES
West London Link Design in association with the Halcrow Group and Hammersmith BID
A TUNNEL TO REPLACE THE HAMMERSMITH FLYOVER: A CHAIN OF OPPORTUNITIES
A4 closed for two plus years
creating widespread disruption.
DEMOLISH AND REBUILD
A4 can stay open during
construction. Requires demolition
of landmark structures.
Must be 20m below surface to
clear LUL tracks.Flyover must be demolished before
tunnel starts.
Deep bore tunnel.Clears surface structures below
A4,A4 stays open through most of
construction programme.
Deep bore tunnel.Surface level works only at end
portals.A4 can remain open during
construction.
No surface level works in Hammersmith.East portal to be integrated with
redevelopment of Earl’s Court
North and South reunited, Opportunities for sustainable regeneration and valuable development released along entire
stretch of route,
East end suffers same problems as
short tunnel option.Demolition of flyover necessary
before completion,
Reduced impact of construction.
A4 barrier eliminated from Chiswick
and west Hammersmith,
At east end gradient requires 400m to
rail cutting. At west, 200m to clear surface road
system. Prolonged construction period
and disruption. Benefits to
Hammersmith when complete.
Temporary works/site logistics:Furnivall GardensFilling station by the Ark
Temporary works/site logistics:Furnivall GardensFilling station by the Ark
A new structure, just like the old,
cutting through the Borough, with
no benefit to Hammersmith.
A new structure, just like the old,
with the loss of local landmarks. No
benefit to Hammersmith.
BUILD NEW FLYOVER(ALONGSIDE EXISTING)
SHORT TUNNEL (CUT AND COVER TUNNEL ON
EXISTING FLYOVER ROUTE)
TUNNEL (HOGARTH TO THE ARK)
LONG TUNNEL (HOGARTH TO EARL’S COURT)
West London Link Design in association with the Halcrow Group and Hammersmith BID
A TUNNEL TO REPLACE THE HAMMERSMITH FLYOVER: A CHAIN OF OPPORTUNITIES
THE GREAT WEST ROAD
ST PAULS CHURCH
KING STREET
HAMMERSMITH BRIDGE
ST PAULS CHURCH
ST PAULS CHURCH
ST PAULS CHURCH
1860
1949
1959
Map showing the impact of WWII bomb damage
A view on St Paul’s Church and Queen
Street from the Broadway, painted around
1835 by James Pollard. By the early 19th
Century Hammersmith was a major trans-
port centre for coach routes to and from
London.
Hammersmith Broadway c1914 Palmer’s
development store was founded in 1886
and demolished in the 1980’s.
Buildings destroyed by a V1 flying bomb on
24 July 1944. The area is now covered by
Furnivall Gardens.
The proposed route of the A4 Great West Road (Talgarth Road western extension) and Hammersmith Flyover (viaduct).
Hammersmith Broadway in the early
1950’s.
Newspaper photograph from the Daily
Telegraph, September 9 1955 showing
Furnivall Gardens and the Great West Road
under construction.
The Great West Road and the proposed flyover.
1 2 HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study
The RTF asserts the need for more radical measures to better balance the competing functions of the road network and to ultimately contribute to its vision of world-class streets, fit for the future. These measures includes different forms of suitably located and designed new or substitute infrastructure, such as floating roundabouts for cyclists and pedestrians, high quality bridges over arterial roads and opportunities for roofing or tunnelling under existing infrastructure at particular locations.
TfL will establish a rolling research and development programme, the component studies of which will:
• Review by mid-2014 possible locations for roofing over major roads, to minimise traffic impact, enable development and reduce community severance, especially to reduce community impacts in growth areas;
• Assess the potential for relocating strategic traffic from the surface and free up space for other uses by the end of 2014; and
• Assess, by mid-2015, the potential for ‘local’ re-located space (such as flyunders of floating roundabouts for cyclists) at particular pinch point locations on the network.”
BackgroundIn 2012, prior to the RTF and TfL’s response, a group of west London architects known as West London Link Design (WLLD), in association with Halcrow Group and Hammersmith BID, presented a report titled: ‘A Tunnel to Replace the Hammersmith Flyover: A Chain of opportunities’.
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 1 3
This document is published in its entirety alongside this report and sets out high-level and conceptual options to replace the A4 between Chiswick and earl’s Court with a tunnel. It states that this tunnel can transform the city by:
• Reuniting north and south;
• Reuniting Hammersmith and Chiswick with the river;
• Rejuvenating the centre of Hammersmith;
• Replacing traffic arteries with boulevards and avenues; and
• Creating development opportunities for workplaces and homes.
WLLD were inspired to explore these opportunities due to the emergency structural works that TfL were required to undertake in 2011 to make the ageing structure safe. The full, and unplanned, closure of Hammersmith Flyover caused significant traffic problems in Hammersmith town centre as the A4 traffic was diverted around Hammersmith Gyratory which struggles to cope with peak traffic at present.
The flyover is currently undergoing a multimillion pound, 18-month refurbishment, running until 2015 to extend the life of the 50-year-old structure. These works are planned and as such
have less of an impact on the surrounding road network. It is inevitable, however, that further works will be required which could take many forms, including its full replacement over the next 50 years. WLLD recognise that now is the time to start thinking more ambitiously about its eventual replacement and that a major infrastructure project, like a tunnel, in a high-density town centre, will take years to plan, procure and build. The time we have is long enough to plan the best solution or short enough to be forced into a quick and dirty fix.
Feasibility studyIt is for these reasons that H&F Council decided to undertake a feasibility study into a flyunder, to respond to the RTF and TfL publications, and to build on the WLLD vision.
It was always recognised that TfL, as strategic highway authority for London, is ultimately responsible for the management and future planning of the A4. The feasibility project was designed in such a way that it would be prepared on TfL’s behalf to fill the gap between the aspirational RTF recommendations and the realistic TfL research and development programme.
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 1 5
LoCAL oPINIoNIt was apparent from the events held by the WLLD group in 2012 that there was significant local interest and support for digging a tunnel for the A4. This feasibility study seeks to build on this support and explore how residents and businesses saw the potential benefits and disbenefits of a tunnel.
The feasibility study was designed with extensive community engagement forming the majority of the early work stages. This was in order to ensure that further local opinion is sought to establish how the technical work stages would be taken forward.
The below statement is taken directly from the feasibility study terms of reference:
To establish, at a preliminary level, the aspirations and any concerns of local residents and businesses.
This engagement was facilitated in a number of ways. First, a dedicated website was set up in order to provide a medium for communication with the wider community. This website received an unprecedented volume of traffic and received one of the highest number of posts the council has ever received. www.lbhf.gov.uk/flyunder
Second, a flyunder summit was held in Hammersmith Town Hall on 10 october 2013. This was an opportunity for the public to see and hear about the work done to date and the feasibility study on the flyunder concept. The flyunder champion hosted the summit and heard a number of presentations, including from WLLD and TfL.
The standing-room-only summit further confirmed the strong local interest, and saw a lively debate
77%
12%
1%6%
4%
agree
indifferentdisagree
strongly disagree
strongly agree
Question 1Do you agree with the council that the Hammersmith Flyover
should be replaced with a flyunder?
1 6 HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study
on the aspirations and concerns of residents and businesses. Those attending were asked to complete an eight question survey designed to help develop the feasibility study work streams. The results from this questionnaire, alongside the web comments, were combined to form the basis for the study.
The results again confirmed the high level of support for a tunnel. However, it also established that there was a range of aspiration with regards to how long the tunnel should be and which routes it should connect to, if at all.
Four main concerns emerged in regards to both construction and operation of a tunnel. The options that were tested as part of the study were appraised using these aspirations and concerns in order to allow a comparison against the options.
The following pages summarise the early study engagement and helped establish the primary level local aspirations and concerns.
These results provided a suitable mandate for the feasibility study to proceed and validated the council’s resolution to work towards a tunnel replacement.
There was a variety of reasons as to why 10 per cent of respondents did not agree with a tunnel replacement.
These ranged from people not having enough information at this stage of the study to make an informed decision, to the flyover being a ‘beautiful structure’, or those that said that the money would be better spent on public transport.
7% 39% 1% 6% 7% 7% 22% 1%3%4%
Hoga
rtH
roUn
daBo
Ut
M4 JU
nCtio
n 1
HaMM
ersM
itH
toWn
Hal
l
tHe a
rK
Baro
ns Co
Urt
nort
H en
d ro
ad
WarW
iCK
road
Hyde
ParK
Corn
er
M4 JU
nCtio
n 2
West
of
JUnC
tion
2
a4 great West road a4 great West roadC
CC
C
T
T
L
L
L
L
L
L
H
H
H
H
H
H
HH
H
H
H
E S
T H
A M
E RR I V
MERRIV THA ES
BATT
ERSEA
REACH
RIV
ER
WA
ND
LE
Chelsea
Harbour
GRAND
UN
ION
CANAL
FulhamBroadway
West Kensington
PutneyBridge
ParsonsGreen
Kensal Green
White City
Goldhawk
East Acton
Hammer-smith
ParkRavenscourt
StamfordBrook
Baron's Court
EarlsCourt
Latimer
Shepherd'sBush
Road
Road
Ham-mersmith
WillesdenJunction
Shepherd'sBush
Kensington(Olympia)
ImperialWharf
WestBrompton
TurnhamGreen
WoodLane
Market
Fulham
Hall
Town HallHammersmith
Town
National Rail
National R
ail
Distric
t Line
National R
ail
National R
ail
Hammersmith
& City
Line
Central line
District Line
District Line
TheQueen's
Club
GardensFurnivall
Brompton
Cemetery
EelBrook
Common
Park
South
Park
Hurlingham
Cemetery
Kensal Green
Cemetery
Little
Scrubs
ParkParkWormholt
Wormwood
Fulham
ParkRavenscourt
Bishops Park
Cemetery
CemeteryHammersmith
The Warren
Normand Park
Common
ParkCathnor
ParkWendell
St. Mary's
WORMWOOD SCRUBS
Hammersmith
ParsonsGreen
Shepherd's Bush
Chis
wic
k Eyo
t
S
SS
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
SS
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
REVO
R
RO
ST-
HA
RTS
WO
OD
JEDDO
KINNEAR RD
RDSWAINSON
TH
IRD
B R A Y B R O O KW U
L F S T A
N
ERCONWALD
FITZNEAL
RD
SOUTHFIELD
BLENHEIM RD
ADDISON GR
AB
ING
ER
FA
IRF
AX
PR
IOR
YA
V
WHELLOCKRD
BLANDFORD
WO
OD
STO
CK
RO
AD
RD
FLANDERS
BATH
RD
RO
MA
N
ROAD
RD
LON
SD
ALE
RO
AD
WENDELL
MA
PL
E
RD
RE
CH
T
MULTI
WARPLE
WAY
PK MSESSEX
BEECH
AV
AVE
HO
LL
EY
RD
LE
FR
OY
RD
MA
YF
IEL
D R
D
COBBOLD AY
LME
R
V A L E T T A
AG
NE
S
RD
RO
AD
CT
GLE
ND
UN
BR
OM
YA
RD
BOWES ROAD
RD
GLE
ND
UN
ASHFIELD
AV
EN
UE
TRINITY
OL
D O
AK
LAN
EN
OM
MO
C
MUIR
BRASSIE
FAIRWAY
DRIVE
RO
AD
BRASSIE
AV
KIN
GS
DO
WN
HO
YLA
KE
AVE AN
DR
EW
'SS
TR
OA
D
THE
LONG
MA
SH
IE
RD
GR
NT
AY
LO
R'S
BY
ET
HE
THE GREEN
SUNNINGDALE
AV
E
AVE
FOLIOT
WAY
MAY-
ROAD
MID
LAN
D
CHANDOS RD
TELFORD
BRUNEL RD
WE
LLS
HO
US
E R
D
WAY
EC
AR
RE
T
ROAD
AT
LA
S
STE
PH
EN
SO
N
ST
GO
OD
HA
LLST
NORTH POLE
WA
LLING
FOR
D
RDSNARSGATE
HIG
HLE
VE
R
CH
ES
TNU
T
ALLE
Y
MERTHYR
TER
TER
ROSEDEW
COLWITH
R A
N N
O C
H
ROAD
EV
ER
ING
TON
SEDLESCOMBERO
AD
RO
AD
CLO
SE
CR
AM
MO
ND
RO
AD
MU
LGR
AV
E
TAM
WO
RTH
ST
ROAD
RO
AD
RO
AD
R O
A D
WESTBRIDGE
BA
CRESCENT
ROAD
ROAD
MONTSERRAT
RO
AD
OX
FOR
D
ST
ESMOND
WIN
TH
OR
PE
RD
WA
DH
AM
RO
AD
ROAD
BE
PL
BE
CTI
VE
RD
BR
AN
DLE
HO
W
DR
LLIGL
EK
S
ROADPARKFAWE
NO
RT
HF
IELD
S
PL
EA
SA
NT
PO
INT
RO
AD
WA
Y
ENTERPRISE
OSIERS
CRESCENT
VIC
AR
AG
E
VICARAGE
GWYNNE
RO
AD
NO
TR
EVL
EY
RD
HA
RR
OW
AY
HOLMAN RD
LOM
BA
RD
RO
AD
ROAD
YO
RK
BR
IDG
ES
CO
UR
T
HOLGATE AVE
CLOSE
WAL
LIS
ST
HIBBERT
HO
PE
STREET
YORK
PLACE
PLAC
E
YORK
WAY
GAR
TON
S
CHATFIELD RD
MENDIPRD
ROAD WYNTER
STREET
USKRO
AD
CLOSE
NANTES
CLO
SE
GARRICK
CLOSE
CLO
SE
TUR
EN
E
CLO
SE
BA
RTH
OLO
ME
W
COLEFORD RD
ST
TON
SLE
Y
HILL
TON
SLE
Y
RO
AD
STM
OR
IES
TE
DG
EL
ST
EBNER RD
RD
BIR
DH
UR
ST
DE
MP
ST
ER
RD
SQMARRYAT
FU
LHA
M
RO
AD
SETTRINGTON
PLA
ST
CL
THO
RN
DIK
E
RO
AD
PETERBORO
UGH
CLOSE
PA
RK
GDS
VILLE
RO
BE
RTS
ST
ME
WS
SO
UTH
ST MARKS C
L
CRABTREE
CHILDERLEY
ST
KINGWOOD
STRODE
PARK
STREET
CREFIELD
CL
WO
OD
LAWN
GRESWELL STREET
RO
AD
DA
NE
ME
RE
RD
RO
SK
ELL
AS
HLO
NE
FE
ST
ING
ST
RO
AD
E M
B A
N K
M E
N T
RUVIGNY
BE
MIS
HFELSHAM
CH
AR
LWO
OD
RE
DG
RA
VE
RD
RD
BENDEMEER
JACKSON
HE
NR
Y
RD
SA
LVIN
RD
RO
TH
ER
WO
OD
RD
GLA
DW
YN
ST
GLE
ND
AR
VO
N
WE
ISS
RDR
OW
BIG
G'S
KINGS-
ST
WAT
ERM
AN
MA
SC
OT
TE
GW
ALI
OR
RD
RD
ROAD CLO
SEM
ER
E
GD
S
RD
RO
ELLERBY
DONERAILE
T H
E
RD
FINLAY
BISHOP'S
BISHO
P'S
CLONCURRY
RO
AD
STREET
STREET
NA
GE
ST
EV
E
LANGTHORNE
QUEENSMILL
WO
OD
LAW
N
LYSIA
LARNACH
NELLA
RO
AD
RO
AD
ETERNIT
WALK
CLO
SE
MILLS
HO
TT
CLOSEROWBERRY
WHEATSHEAF
MEADOWBANK
CLOSE
HO
LY
LANE
BOWFELLRDSKELWITH
RA
INV
ILLE
WINGRAVE
PE
TLE
Y
RD
RD
STREET
INGLETHORPE
HARBORD
KENYON
STREET
RO
AD
NITON
STREET
ROAD
STREET
STREET
STREET
STREET
STREETATALANTA
DELORME
AVERILL
ROAD
ROAD
SILVERTONELLALINE
R O
A D
ROAD
LANE
BOTHWELL
STREETHAW
KSMOOR
STREET
STREET
STREET ST
CLOSEADENEY
ANCILL
ROAD
ROAD
ALTHEA ST
STMEAD
RD
CAMBRIA
WANDON RD
FORD
ACKMAR R
D
ELTHIRON RD
BASUTO
WHITTINGSTALL
VERA RO
ADGOWAN
ROAD
RO
AD
ROAD
ROAD
LINV
ER
AT
NE
Y R
OA
D
DE
OD
ARFL
OR
IAN
RD
ROAD
FULH
AM
RDDURRELL
ROAD
CLOSE
STEEPLE
BU
RS
TO
CK
RD
ST
WEI
MAR
BR
EW
HO
US
E
DEODAR
ME
RIV
ALE
RO
AD
RO
AD
STH
IGH
WILLOWBANK
GATE
CHURCH
STVILLEGON-
RANELAGH
AP
PR
STATION
WALD
EMAR
EDGARLEY
TER
AVENUE
ROADCOLEHILL
GDNS
KIM
BE
LL GS
FIRTH
GS
CO
LEH
ILL
RIGAULT
BU
RLIN
GTO
N
BUER
RO
AD
PLACE
BURLINGTON
COMBERIN
GMERBURNFOOT
OXBER
RY
HORDER
RDD
OR
NC
LIFFE
AV
GARDENS
GDNS
HURLINGHAM
ED
EN
HU
RS
T
NA
PIE
RRA
NE
LAG
H
CROOKHAM ROAD
MIM
OSA STREET
LETT
ICE
LAUR
EL
RD
LANDRIDGE
FULH
AM
GD
HURLINGHAM
GR
IM
ELYSIUM
RD
RD
RD
PARK
FO
SK
ET
T
EWA
DO
LBY
AV
RD
EU
NE
VA
PK
RD
STR
EE
T
NS
DANCER ROAD
BETTRIDGE
CO
RT
AY
NE
ASHINGTO
NRO
AD
CR
ISTO
WE
BANK
RD RO
AD
ALD
ER
VILLE
ROAD
RD
HEATH
ED
DIS
CO
MB
E
DIONIS
RD
ST
ROAD
STREET
DORIA
GU
ION
RO
AD
ROAD
PERRYMS
TRE
ET
CT
DAISY
SULI
SULIVAN
LAN
E
CARNWATH
LANE
FORDM
OLES-
PE
TE
RB
OR
OU
GH
CO
NIG
ER
BR
OO
MH
OU
SE
MEWSBOROUGHPETER-
BR
OO
MH
OU
SE
RO
AD
RO
AD
IRENE
DELVIN
O
RD
DIN
GS
TON
E
ST
CLAN
STUDDRIDGE
RO
AD
ST
CARTY
ST
QU
AR
RE
ND
ON
BR
AD
BO
UR
NE
CHID
CRONDACEROAD
RD
CHIPS
RO
AD
RD
ROSEBURYSTE
PHEN
DALE
WOOLNEIGH
HUGON
SQPHILPOT
RO
AD
DYM
OC
K
ST
BR
EE
R
STR
EE
TS
TRE
ET
ROAD
ROAD
DEM
ORG
AN RD
HAMBLE
HAZLEBURY
SANDILANDS
INGDON
BELTRAN
STASHCOMBE
STNARBOROUGH
STFRISTON
ROAD
RD
RCH
RYECROFT
STREET
BO
WE
RD
EA
N S
T
EA
D
STR
EE
T
ST
OK
EN
ST
CHU
ST
BOV
RD
AC
FO
LD
RD
BROU
RDSNOWBURY
KBURY RD
CR
AN
BU
RY
RD
OA
ROAD
FU
RN
ES
S
GILSTEAD
PEARSCROFT
RDRD
COURT
RSCROFT
PEA-RD
CLOSE
WAITE
ROAD
SWIFT ST
FILM
ER
FERNHURST ROAD
ST
PETER'S
ESTCOURTPROTHEROMENDORA
ROAD CHALDON
AINTREEROADHANNELL
ROAD
RO
AD
SID
BU
RY
STLAMBROOK
WARDO
ST
TER
DANEHURST
WYFOLD
ALLESTREE ROADROWALLAN ROAD
ROADMABLETHORPEBRONSART ROAD
BR
ON
SA
RT
ROADKILMAINE ROAD
ROAD
REPORTON
AVENUE
AVENUE
STREET
BISHOP'S
LANE
ROAD
STOLAF'S
STREET
ORBAINSHERBROOKE
ROSALINE
VA
RN
A
ROADROAD
ROAD
RO
AD
BEDFORD PS
HU
MB
OLT
RO
AD
HUMBOLT ROAD
DISBROWE
WK
CAR
OLIN
EA
BB
EY
LAU
ND
RY
RD
RC
CL
PU
RC
ELL
RD
BA
YO
NN
E
BRECON RD
LAMPETER
GDNS
PE
LLAN
T
ROAD
MO
YLA
N R
OA
D
ROAD
BRECON
ROAD DELAFORD
TILTON
TOURNAY
ST. THOMAS'S W
AY
HA
RTIS
ME
RE
FA
BIA
N R
OA
D
ROAD
RO
AD
ROAD
OP'S
WIN
CH
END
ON
MIR
AB
EL R
OA
D
BLO
OM
PA
RK
TERMARVILLE
CH
ES
ILTON
RO
STR
EV
OR
FELD
EN
ROAD
RO
AD
RO
AD
MEW
S
RO
AD
RA
DIP
OLE
BISH
LILYV
ILLE
BROOKVILLEROSAVILLE
PARKVILLE
ROAD
LETTER-
STONE
RO
AD
RD
RO
AD
ROAD
ROAD
ROAD
RO
AD
DARLAN
RO
ADR
OA
DST M
AUR
ROAD
CLO
NM
EL
EPPLE
PLACEBRID
GES
CROSS
ROAD
ROAD
SHORROLDS
E RD
BURNTH
EPIRU
S
RO
AD
RY
LSTO
N
STREET
ROAD
ST
ROAD
COOMER PL
HALDANE
COOMER
MEWS
KEMPSON
AV
EHARW
OOD
MOORE
MSEPIRUS
FARM
CAMPANA
BA
RC
LAY
CL
JERDAN
NOVELLO
SHOTTENDANE
DOWN
HARBLE
RD
RDELMS RD
PLACE
FIELD
HECK-ROAD
ROAD
PULTON
BARCLAY
CASSIDYROAD
VANSTON
PARTHENIA
ST
RD
RD
RD
FAV
ROAD
RM
US
G
AR
GO
N
RD
MS
EFFIE
PLACE
BROADWAY
FULHAM
RD
ANSELM
EUSTACERD
ARMADALE
HALFORD
ROAD
ROAD
RACTON
RD
KN
IVE
TT
RD
WALHAM
ROADROAD
LANE
LANE
GROVE
FARM
RD
MIC
KLE
THW
AITE
STREET
BILLI
NG
RD
AVALON RD
HARWOOD
HILARY
RDTYRAW
LEY
BLAKE
CRES
RD
GDS
BOROUGH
PETER-
VILLA
S
ROAD
WANSDOWN
WA
TER
FOR
D
CE
DA
RN
E
RD
PLACE
BR
ITA
NN
IA
PARK
LOR
D
IMP
RO
WED
MICHAEL
TER
MELD
ON
CHERYLS
CL
CLOSE
ROAD
WAY
BRITANNIA
RO
AD
EMD
EN
SQ
RIALE
ST
SANDS END LANE
ITH
ST
RD
RUMBOLD RD
ROAD
WKLENODAN
WELL
MA
X
HOLMEAD RD
CR
ESCEN
T
PARK
BROMPTON
BILLING RD
PL
BILLI
NG
MO
RR
IS
EDENVALE ST
WILLIAM
ST
CHARLOW
CL
LANE
WATERMEADOW
PO
TTE
RS
STEPHENDALE
LINDROP ST
ST
QU
ER
RIN
BYAM
GLENROSA ST
RO
AD
KIL
RD
ST
ST
TYNEMOUTH ST
ELBE
RO
AD
RD
ST
ELSW
ICK
MAL
TIN
GS
STREET
RO
AD
WAY
Pier
Chelsea
Harbour
GR
OVE
ASHBURNHAM
STADIUM
GR
OVE
UP
CE
RN
E
TETC
OTTST
STFORD
SAND
-
REWELL
TETC
OTT
RD
RO
AD
LOTS
Chelsea
RO
AD
BURNABY
UV
ER
DA
LETA
DE
MA
RO
AD
RD
TERDAMER
FERN
SHAW
HO
RTEN
SIA
GU
NTER
EDITH TER
RDED
ITH
WharfChelsea
Creek
Wharf
ROAD
CREMORNE RD
RD
ST
Cremorne
AVENUE
HAR
BOU
R
HARBOUR DR
CH
ELSEA
SQUARE
ADMIRAL
THAMES AVE
PODMORE ROAD
ALM
A DIGHTONRD
BR
AM
FOR
D R
D
DA
LBY
RD
BA
LLAN
TIN
E S
T
YORK
ELTRINGHAM
PETERGATE
MARL RD
FERRIER ST
SMUGGLERS WAY
SMU
GG
LERS
OLD
YO
RK
RO
AD
MAYNARD C
L
GWYNCLOSE
JEW
SROW
ROAD
AVENUE
AVENUE
AVENUE
AV
EN
UE
AV
EN
UE
ROAD
HURLINGHAM
SQUARE
WILL
IAM
BURY
MS
R'S
ALLE
Y
WHEAT-
SHEAF
TERR
PALACEMEWS
CLARE
MWS
BROUGHTON
RD APPROACH
MU
STO
W
ST
ELYSIU
M P
L
MS
BR
AN
KS
EA
GRAN-
PLACE
MELBRAY
MS
LALOR ST
EXETER
MEW
S
JOHN
AVENUE
INGRAMMARGARET
CLOSE
PL
LEN
HU
GH
DALTON
AVE
HUGH
CL
GA
ITS
KE
LL
SW
AN
MS
WALK
BOLING
BROKE
LAN
E
SUNBU
ROAD
CHURCH
BA
TTE
RS
EA
ROAD
ST
RE
ET
HIG
H
ROAD
ELLI
VR
O
TCE
ROAD
ROAD
WORLIDGE ST
IMRE CL
ALDENSLEY
RD
LILY
ST
BROOK
HEM
OLD
CLOSEPARNELL
ELG
IN
AV
E
SIDE RDGREEN-
CREIGHTON
STREET
BEAUFORT
MS
TELEPHONE
PL
LANFREYPL
CHEESEMANS
ELSHAM
HOFLAND
UPPER ADDIS
ONLORNE
CRE
PL
Q U E E N S D A L E
GDS
MARY
ST ALBAN'SCHELMSFORD
ROAD
DN
OM
HCI
R
ROADROADANLEY RDS
YC
AM
OR
E
FIE
LD R
DL
EY
S-
WE
ST
VIL
LE R
OA
D
RY
LET
T
AS
HHURCHBASSEIN
PA
RK
CT
RAVENS-
LION
STAM
ME
RT
ON
AV
RD
GA
INS
BO
RO
UG
H
AV
EN
UE
RO
AD
BR
ITIS
H
AIR
ED
ALE
CL
EV
EL
AN
D A
V
NE
TH
ER
AV
ON
EV
OR
G
NOI
L
S'R
ET
EP
TS
SQ
UA
RE
QS
S'R
ET
EP
TS
ST PETER'S SQ
GS
MAL
L
GR
BRITISH
EY
OT
BERESTEDE
RD
GS
EY
OT
GS
TERHAMMERSMITH
VERBENA
LA
SQUARE
CROFT
SQ
MS
EV
OR
GBLACK LION
BR
OO
K
VAUGHAN AV
BROOKRDPALGRAVE
SOUTH
PR
EB
EN
D
FORD
PLE
YD
ELL
AV
SIDE
ST
AM
FO
RD
FL
MS
CO
S
BALMORAL
RO
AD
FO
BINDEN
CL
GDNS
STAMFORD
RA
VE
NS
CO
UR
T
OURT
AV
EN
UE
SQ
UA
RE
TERASHC
CRESCENT
ROAD
RD
RD
RO
AD
VILLA
SA
SH
CH
UR
CH
AMOR
RO
AD
KILMARSH
LONSDALE
RD
GLENTHAM
LILLIAN
ARUROAD
DR
S'A
DLI
H T
S
OADR
AV
RIVERVIEWCLAVE
GDNS
TR
UO
CS
NE
VA
R
UPPER
LA
NEST PETER'S
SO
UT
H
CO
UR
TR
DSAM
ELS PLACENAPIERLORD
LAN
EO
IL M
ILL
GDS
THERESA RHSI
DN
AT
S
ST
S'R
ET
EP
HAMLET
HA
ML
ET
GD
S
RO
VA
EB
PA
RK
RIV
ER
CO
UR
T
RO
AD
RO
AD
MALL
EC
AL
P
TR
UO
CN
EV
WE
LTJE
RA
VE
NS
-
AV
E
CO
UR
T
EN
AL
GO
HE
RIH
SP
MA
H
RAVENSCOURT
PLACE
SID
EE
N
RA
VE
NS
CO
UR
T
GARDENS
SQ
GR
.
CH
UR
CH
GD
SK
ELM
SC
OT
T
RO
AD
DO
RV
ILLE
WIN
GA
TE
WELLESLEY
AV
RD
CR
LAM
ING
TO
N
REDMORE RD
RO
AD
CA
MB
RID
GE
GLENTHORNE
LOWER
RIVERSIDE
NIG
EL
GDS
MS
ET
AGL
EF
NIG
EL
PLA
YFA
IR
EV
A RI
AF
YAL
P
VA
LLE
WM
OR
C
ALBION
PL
HO
L-
ST
CO
MB
E
DR
MEWS
AV
E
BR
IDG
E
MA
CB
ET
H
GAR
DENS
MALL
GVE
RUTLAND
MA
LLR
D
WEI
VE
GDI
RB
PLACE
GR
OV
E
AR
GY
LEP
L
DOWN
AS
PE
NP
LD
IME
S
ST
RE
ET
LE
AM
OR
E S
TR
EE
T
BRACKENBURY
BENBOW
BA
NIM
PERRERS
RAYNHAM
ATWOOD
RD
FURBER
DA
LLIN
G ST
RE
ET
ST
BR
AD
MO
RE
PK
RD
RO
AD
ST
RE
ET
RO
AD
CA
RD
RO
SS
NA
SM
YT
H
AD
RO
AD
CA
RT
HE
WB
RA
CK
EN
BU
RY
HEBRON
RO
BA
T
RO
AD
RO
AD
ROAD
SO
UT
HE
RT
ON
IFF
LEY
RD
ADIE
MARCO
RD
RD
IFF
LEY
CARTHEW
COULTER
VILLAS
GDNS
BEAUCLERC
ROAD
AG
AT
E
RD
GS
ROAD
ST JAMES
BERYL
PARFREY STREET
ST DUNSTAN'S
CHANCELLOR'SST
RD
LOCHALINE
WINSLOW
DIS
TILLER
Y R
D
ROAD
STP
LAY
FAIR
CLA
YB
RO
OK
MAR
GR
AVINE
ROADASPENLEA
GASTEIN
CLAXTON
RDLU
RG
AN
AV
RD
GROVE
CLOSE
BROOK
STERNDALE
DEWHURST
NETHERWOOD
BISCAYYELDHAM
LUX
EM
BU
RG
GARDENS
WA
LK
CHANCELLORS
TERRIVER
CRISP ST
BLACK'S
AN
GE
L
RO
AD
RO
AD
ROAD
ROAD
BU
TE
MELROSE
BATOUM
LENA
TRUSSLEY
OV
ER
ST
ON
E
RD
RD
ST
RE
ET
ME
WS
GR
OV
E
MS
AS
TR
OP
TCEASTROP
RD
SU
LGR
AV
E
RD
TCE
MS
ROAD
BA
RB
HSUB S'DREHPEHS
CROMWELL
GARDENS
RD
GDNS
LOR
IS
ME
LRO
SE
GR
GDNS
GREEN
GREAT CHURCH
ROAD
RO
WA
NTE
RR
AC
E
GA
RD
EN
SN
OTR
EVL
OW
RO
WA
N
SH
OR
T L
AN
DS
MARGRAVINE
SN
ED
RA
G T
EL
OCCLOSE
WATERHOUSE
MORE CLOSE
WINDSOR
CAITHNESS
DAN
IRVING
BLYTHE
BOLINGBROKE
US
TIN
E
GA
RD
EN
S
HAARLEMRD
BROOK
DU
NS
AN
Y
AU
G
GREEN
GREEN
RO
AD
APPLEGARTH
GART
H
ROAD
RO
AD
RD
LAKESIDE
RO
AD
ROAD
RE
FAR
OE
CE
YLO
N
MA
SB
RO
'
RO
AD
GIR
DLERS
AYN
HO
EROAD
SOU
L-ROADDERN
ROAD
MILSON
FIELDING
VA
LE T
ER
SP
RIN
G-
STREET
ROAD
RD
MILSON
RO
AD
RO
AD
RDROAD
PRIMULA
LIL
CU
STREET
RD
COURT
ASKHAM
PL
CU
RW
EN
VESPAN
THE
ARMSTRONG
ROAD
RD
CO
WLE
Y R
DA
V
SE
CO
ND
AS
KH
AM
ASKEW
ST ELMO
RD
FIE
LDO
LD
-
BECKLOW
ST
RO
NS
A
GAYFORD
R O A D
ELIZ
AB
ET
HD
AV
IS
GDS
AV
ST
ELM
OR
D
RD
ROAD
PARK
RY
LET
T
ROAD
RD
ROAD
ROAD
ROAD
MS
LAU EN
CE
R
LANDOR
HADYN
WK
OLLGAR CLOSE
CLIFTON
CR
ASKEW
AV CR
ES
RO
AD
WALLFLO
YEW
L O
C K
STEVENTON
ROAD
AV
EN
UE
FIR
ST
ROAD
ST
HILARY
WAY
FOXGLOVE
SQTAMARIS
K
H E M
RD
RO
AD
AYCLIFFE
URNE
S A W L E Y
ALDBO
RO
AD
ST
SE
DG
EF
OR
D
ROAD
CLEMATIS
TREE
R O
A D
DAFFODIL
WER
VIOLASQ
SUN
DEWSTREET
MELLITUS
NORBROKE
WA
LK
ST
STREET
S T R
E E
T
STREET
CA
CT
US
STREET
HIL
AR
Y
WK
ON
IA
STREET
HEN
CH
MAN
STOSMUND
S T
R E
E T
BE
G-
QU
AR
TE
RS
WE
ST
STREET
BENNELONG
ROAD
STANLAKE VILLAS
AVEN
UE
RD
AUSTRALIA
ROAD
GR
OV
E
GR
OV
E
GR
OV
E
RO
AD
RO
AD
BATSON
FINDON
ROAD
ST
AR
FIE
LD
DA
VIS
VIL
LE
PARK
ROXWELL
RO
AD
RO
AD
RO
AD
PE
RC
YP
ER
CY
RO
AD
ROAD
LYCETT
KEITH
RO
AD
GR
OV
E
CL
WE
ST
-
ROAD
RO
AD
GOODWIN
ST
RO
AD
RD
LEFFERN
RD
ELL
ING
HA
M
ROAD
CA
TH
NO
R
ME
LINA
RD
RO
AD
BO
S
HAM
CONING-
ROAD
VA
LEW
ILLOW
DUNRAVEN
GR
AV
ES
EN
D
WO
RM
HO
LT
ROAD
ROAD
TH
OR
PE
BA
NK
GA
LLOW
AY
RD
ST
PA
N
ST
BRYONY
ORCH ID
AC
RVE
ST
THE
CU
GD
S
SY
RVE
MILF
OIL
R O A D
AD
ELA
IDE
OA
KL
AN
DS
OR
MIS
TO
N
HALSBURY
ROAD
ST
ER
ICA
ROAD
BLO
EM
FO
NT
EIN D
AO
R
THORNFIELD
SCOTT'S
RO
RO
AD
RO
AD
ROAD
HE
TLE
Y
S'N
EH
PE
TS
TS
GO
DO
LPH
INR
DLL
OS
RE
GNI
RD
AR
MIN
GE
R
RO
AD
RO
AD
ROAD
G'HK
AV
EN
UE
RO
AD
TITMUSS
ROAD
DE
VO
NP
OR
T
WA
RB
EC
K
DA
OR
CO
VE
RD
ALE
DA
OR
RO
AD
ROAD
C O M M O N W E A L T H A V E
ROAD
ELLERSLIE
AVE
SOUTH
RD
ETHELDEN
WA
Y
COMMON-
AUSTRALIA
IND
IA
CA
NA
DA
AFRICA
EL
AD
BA
SU
TF
OL
CLOSE
BATMAN
STAN
SWINDON ST
SIN
UT
ROAD
WA
Y
RO
AD
AU
ST
RA
LIA
DORANDO
CLOSE
BENTWORTH
AR
TIL
LE
RY
LA
NE
STREET HEATHSTAN
MA
UR
ICE
ST
ST
TE
RR
ICK
MEWS
RD
SHALFLEET DR
Y E
L M
A R
B
WESTWICK
MINFORD
ST
TADMOR
SILV
ER
RO
AD
EN
AL
RA
FC
AM
WO
OD
-
MA
RK
ET
GR
OV
E
SH
EP
HE
RD
'S
RIC
HF
OR
D
BU
SH
WE
LLS
GER
RO
AD
EMI
L
SN
ED
RA
G
PE
NN
AR
D
ST
HOPG
OO
D
RD
ROAD
BA
MB
-
POPLAR
GDS
GROVE
BULWERST
ST
INE
ALD
NO
TX
AC
RD
FR
ITH
VILLE
OSEC
L
WHITE CITY
EXHIBITION
CLOSE
RE
LA
Y R
OA
D
ARIEL
WAY
RD
CHARECROFT WAY
RO
CK
LEY
GDNS
GARDENS
ROAD
STSTERNE
GDNS
SINCLAIR
WO
OD
STOC
K
YA
W
GR
OH
AN
SA
RD
ME
WS
NO
RLA
ND
CLE
AR
WA
TER
YA
L
TCE
RO
CR
RO
YA
L
MS
VILLA
S
AN
N'S
R O
A D
OLA
F
ST
F R
E S
T O
N
BA
RD
STEVESHAM
RD
COMBE
SW
AN
S-
MORTIMER
RDSQ
WILSHAM
ST
PLSTONELEIGH
STO
NE
LEIG
H
TREADGOLD
AN
SLE
IGH
AN
N'S
PL
ST
ST
WHITCHURCH RD
SIR
DA
R
ALED
AV
ON
BOMORE
LLE
FN
ER
G
ST
L A
T I M
E R
SHINFIELD
CAV
EYNH
AM
NASCOT
GLEN
STWALL
STST
ROY
ERS-
ST
RO
AD
ST
OXFORD
KINGSBRIDGE
RO
AD
LATIMER
R O
A D
PL
KELFIELD
RD
R O
A D
BASSETT RD
GARDENS
DARFIELD
WAYNFLETE
WAY
SQ
FINS
TOC
K
GARDENS
AV
EN
UE
RD
HE
LEN
'S
GD
NS
CAMBRIDGE GDNS
STREET
BLECHYNDEN
KINGS
SILCHESTER
YE
LE
MA
RB
DA
OR
RD
CLOSE
CR
ROAD
CL
CLBELLAM
Y
STANIER
THAXTON
RO
GD
NS
PE
MB
RO
KE
PEMBROKE
DENS
ROAD
CH
A
GLE
DS
TAN
ES CHARLEVILLE
CLUB
FAIRHOLME
RO
AD
SP
EN
CE
RM
S
TER
FIELD
TAS
SO
RD
KIN
NO
UL
GARDENS
QU
EE
N'S
CLU
B
ST
MU
SA
RD
ANDREW'S
QUEEN'S
GDS
RDPERHAM
RO
AD
CHESSON
RO
AD
RD
CHESSON
BRAMBER
RDARCHEL
NO
RM
AN
D
TURNE-
VILLE
RD
ROAD
TU
RN
EV
ILLER
D
RD
ARCHEL
SQ
EC
AL
P
ROAD
ROAD
ROAD
STFANE
MARCHBANK
FRANKLIN
EU
NE
VA
NAPIER
CASTLETOWN
ROAD
ADDISON BR
MORE
ROAD
ROAD
GORLESTON
SOU
TH-
COMERAGHBARTON ROAD
VERNON
AVEFITZ-
EDITH
RO
AD
DENSGAR
PA
LLISE
R R
OA
D
BARON'S
AUR
IOL
NO
DDI
LG
ED
ITH
RO
AD
CLOSE
ROAD
GUNTERSTONE
MU
ND
EN
ST
COM
BE ST
DR
GL
AZ
BU
RY
COURT
GWENDWRRD
VE
RE
KE
R
MS
ST
AVEFITZJAMES
ROADTR
EV
AN
ION
GDS
RUSSELL
ROAD
GR
ATT
ON
HA
ZLI
TT
ROAD
BLYTHE
WAY
RO
AD
WALK
LYO
NS
MACLISE
BEAC
ONSF
IELD
ROAD
TERR
ACE
RUSSELL GARDENS MEWS
RD
RD
PO
RT
EN
RD
RD
SIN
CLA
IR
ROAD
RD
RD
RUSSELL
BISHOP KING'SROAD
EA
RS
BY PLA
CE
ADDISON
SON
GDSLANDHO
L-
R O
A D
ADD
I
CRES
ROAD
ROAD
CH
ALLO
NE
RS
T
ROAD
CR
CR
LLO
NE
R
BE
AU
MO
NT
MONT
BEAU
LIS
EDITH VILLAS
NOR
CR
ESE
ND
RDSTO
NOR
STANWICK
AV
RD
MORNINGTON
ROAD
MAT
HES
ON
AVONMORE
MUND ST
TT
AVI
AV
AIS
GILL
CLOSE
BECKFORD
WARW
ICK
HOLLAND PK RD
NA
PIE
R P
L
ROADRO
AD
RADNOR
TER
RD
OAKWOOD COURT
ADD
ISONRD
MELBURY
EDW
ARD
ESPLA
BB
OT'S
ST M
AR
Y
PEMBROKE
GDS
GAR
SQ
REDCLIFFE SQ
CO
LEHER
NE
F I N
B O
R
CR
ES
ON
GAR
PL
ROAD
RICKETT
HILDYARD
SE
AG
RA
VE
YDLILLIE
RDMERRINGTON
RD
RESS
EM
P-
ST
PLROXBY
IFIELD
REDCLIFFE SQ
TERW
ESTGATE
U G
H
MS
O
RO
AD
REDCLIFFE S
T
EARL'S
PENYWERN R
OAD
LOGAN PLACE
CR
OM
WELL
GARD
SQ
NEVERN
LONGRIDGE
ROAD
CLUNY
PH
ILC
RES
NEVERN
NEVERN ROAD
TREBO
VIR R
OAD
GD
NS
EA
RD
LEY
KE
M
NEVER
N SQ
NEVERN
SQ
SQ
CLO
SE
RD
PE
MB
RO
KE
CO
LEHER
NE
EARL'S COURT SQ
COURT
MS
KR
AM
ER ST
WHARFEDALE
QU
EE
NS
DA
LE
R O A D
AD
DIS
ON
V I L
L A
SS
Q
H O
L L
A N
D
ENT
GDNS
PL
ADDISON
SC
GD
NS
HO
LLAN
D P
K
DA
LE
AV
EN
UE
QU
EE
NS
-WK
NO
RLA
ND
PO
TTER
Y
RO
AD
RO
AD
STREET
GARDENSDARNLEY
RO
AD
PENZANCE
PRINCES
PENZANCE ST
PR
INC
ED
ALE
RUNCORNPA
RKP
AR
KP
LG
OR
HA
M
PL
PL
PLHESKETHR
OA
DT
HR
ES
HE
RS
PL
AV
ON
DA
LE
RD
WA
LME
R
CLA
RE
ND
ON
PO
RT
RO
AD
PL
RO
AD
LANE
PLA
CE
STDULFORD
HammersmithPier
NEW ZEALAND
WAY
ROAD
ROAD
ROAD
ROAD
DISTILLERY
LANE
MAN
B
CUMBERLAND
AVE
QU
EE
NS
CR
ES
EN
T
KIN
GS
DA
LE
GA
RD
EN
S
OLYM
PIA
WAY
STO
WE
BRITI
SH
MUL-
BERRY
PL
MILLER'SCT
GROV
E
STH
AITEN
PL
NO
BM
AH
C
PL
NORTH
SUSSEXPL
ALBION
MS
MS
FORGE
MEWS
BECKLOW
MEW
S
ED
AN
SCT
GR
AN
SD
EN
RD
CO
LLING
BO
UR
NE
RO
AD
NIE
TN
OF
ME
OLB
YA
W
PEONY
GDS
STOKESLE
Y ST
PIONEERCLOSE
EK
AL
NA
TS
POPL
AR MS
MILLER'S
WAY
OS
MA
N
RD
BLYTHEMS
BE
RG
-M
S
MS
OXFORD
GATE
MER
CERS
PLAC
E
CHARLOTTE
MEW
S
CHALK HILL
ROAD
COM
ME
WS
NORMAND
MS
Frank
Banfield
Park
ORCHARD
SQ
LANGTRY PL
PRINCE'S
MEWS
GS
VER-
NTHBENA
CHISWICK
BR
AD
ING
TCE
CT
AUGUSTUS
CLOSE
GA
INS
BO
RO
UG
HC
OU
RT
CL
APP
STATION
RUCKLIDGE
AVENUE
SALTER STREET
STA
TION
CLIFTON
H Y T H ER D
Trading EstateGateway
CREWEPL
ENTER
ST
FORTUNE
WA
Y
BUCKINGHAM
RD
HONEYWOOD
RD
RO
AD
BRAC
EWELL R
D
WOODMANS
Industrial Park
Mitre Bridge
MITR
E
HILL FARM RD
OAKWORTH ROAD
S T Q U I N T I N A V E N U E
CA
LD-
AV
E
PLERO
N
BARLBY
DALGARNO
D A L G A R N O
BREW
STER G
DS
NO
TT
US
HIG
HLE
VE
R
QU
INTIN
RD
GDNS
WA
Y
WA
Y
SU
TT
ON
WA
YP
AN
GB
OU
RN
E
G A R D E N S
ROAD
PURVES
HAZEL RD
R O A DH Y T H E
LETCHFORD
VALLIERE
RIGELEY
WALDO
GD
NS
LET
CH
FO
RD
KE
NM
ON
T
RD
MS
RD
GD
NS
P A L E R M O
LEGHO
RN
RD
FURNESS
ROAD RD
ODESSAWROTTE
R O A D
GD
NS
TRE
NM
AR
VICTOR
GD
NS
HO
LBE
RT
ON
ROAD
PONSARD RD
NAPIER RD
RO
AD R
OA
DR
AV
EN
SW
OR
TH
FE
LIX
TO
WE
RO
AD
PLACE
ALMA
GR
EY
HO
UN
D R
OA
D
BATHURST GDNS
RO
AD
ASHBURNHAMROAD
BURROWSROAD
EG
ELL
OC
RAINHAM RD
WAKEMAN RD
MORTIMER ROAD
Hythe RoadIndustrial
Estate
GW
ALI
OR
RD
LIF
FO
RD
RD
LACYRD
CARDINALRD
BANGA
BLA
CK
ET
T
ST
AN
BR
IDG
E
FA
RLO
W
RD
WY
MO
ND
WOL
TN
EP
NO
TF
ES
RD
ST
ST
ST
ST
ST
DA
FU
RS
T
DR
YA
DS
T
CLOSE
STOCKHURST
ELA
DN
OM
MO
C
WAY
HORNE WAY
SO
ME
RV
ILLE
AVBRASENOSE
DVE
OR
IEL
DVE
CH
UR
CH
ROAD
CART
WRI
GHT
WAY
WYATT
DR
IVE
EV
DW
YA
TT
TRINITY
HEIDEGGERCRES
EDMUNDS
SQ
SAINTCA
STE
LNA
U
GLE
NT
HA
MG
DN
S
LON
SDAL
E
ROAD
HOWSMANROAD
NOWELL ROAD
KILMING
TON RO
ADVE
RD
UN
RO
AD
FERRYLANE
CHISW
ICK
MALL
NETHERAVEN
RD
CORNWALL GVEBALFERNGVEASH
GROVE
WILTONAVE
BROOK
RD BEVERLEY
ROAD
HO
ME
FIE
LDR
OA
D
KCI
WSI
HC
LAN
E
EN
NIS
MO
RE
AV
UP
HA
MP
AR
K
TH
OR
NT
ON
AV
RA
VE
NS
ME
DE
WA
Y
STH
RO
AD
LANESOUTH
WO
OD
STO
CK
RD
QU
EE
N
RUPERT RD
AN
NE
'SG
DN
S
TH
EA
VE
NU
E
GREENEND
RD
RUGBYRD
SALTCOATS
RDHAMILT
ONRD
HA
WK
S-
RD
ST
.
RD
RD
AL
EX
AN
DR
A
GE
OR
GE
S
HATFIELD
ROAD
HE
AD
RD
CANHAM RD
ST
AN
LEY
GA
RD
EN
S
BRADFORD
RD
OAKWAY
SY
CA
MO
RE
CLS
EAST
ACTON
LANE
CA
RLI
SLE
AV
EN
UE
THE
TEE
SHAF
GD
NS
SCHOOL RD
BETHUNE RD
BASHLEY
RD
ST.
LEONARD'SRD
HARLEY RD
CAPLE
RDRANELAGH
RD
AVENUERD
BUCKINGHAMM
WS
SPEZIA RD
SUNBEAMCR
SHREWSBURY ST
SHREWSBURYST
ST.
TEMPLETO
N PLAC
E
RED
CLIFFE
GARDENS
CATHCART RD
FAWCETT S
T
REDCLIFFE
PL
SLA
IDB
UR
N S
T
BLA
ST
ST
NA
VIL
US
CT
PL
CASS
PLA
CE
CLPL
TH
AM
ES
PL
RUVIGNYCL
LOWERRICHMOND
RD
MUNSTER CT
LANCAS
COURT
ACCESS
ROAD
BURFORD WK
OAK
LEY WK
PAYNES
WK
FRE
EM
AN
SMITH
SR
ET
UH
S
SQVINE
SQ
SU
N
RD
INGTON
HALL
GDS
KENS-
DIEPPE
CLO
SE
MAY ST
AISGILL
AV
SQ
FARNELL
MS
STH EDWARDES
SQ
ST MARY ABBOTS TCE
STRANGW
AYS
TCE
RD
ILCHESTER
AB
BO
TSB
UR
YRD
AB
BO
TSB
UR
YC
L
OAKWOOD
LN
SOM
ERSE
T
SQ
RO
AD
ST
AVONMORE
VERNON
HAZLITT
BROO
K
BLA
CK
LAN
E
GA
RD
EN
S
ROAD
RD
FIELDINGRD
CRESSY
RO
AD
RO
AD
SU
LGR
AV
EGD
S
D'PORT
MS
LAR
CH
AV
DU
CR
OS
RD
EMLYN
GNS
ST
MARKETAPP
VERITYCL
CHARLOTTE
MS
RD
NO
RLA
ND
SQ
NORLAND
PL
CLO
SE
PO
RTLA
ND
RD
POR
TLAND
RD
HU
DS
ON
KC
OLE
VA
H
CL C
L
COMMONWEALTH
AVE
TEMPLEMEAD CL
CROW RD
MYLNECL
BLA
CK
PASS
RD
AD
AM
WK
WESTVIEW
CL
ST
NURSERY
LANE
BLAKESCL
ME
TH
WO
LD R
D
ST
AB
LE W
AY
WAY
WE
BB
CL
WENDOVER
RD
ROAD
CU
MB
ER
LAN
D P
K
STM
ARK'S
RD
PARSONS
RD
RD
TES
THORNE
DOWN
FIELD
IDY ROAD
TER
WEALTH
GO
ATE
LAKE
GIR
ON
D
SALIS-
CH
GR
E
TH
BE
TONE
ACHENS
GAR
TERRACE
MEWS
BR
IDG
E
TTERSEA
RY
KIE
GHTON
ENSCRAV
LD R
D
WEST
STO
N
ST
CRAN-
CTI
BOU
VE
RNE
ND
ELRING
MU
R
RE
RD
DO
STREET
CO
MB
E
PS
F
LANE
OR
D
RD
AD
TEAD
NTY
HESTER
RE
PUR
SERS
MANS
ART
VAN
CRES
CE
FUL-
CHIS
RO
AD
BUCHANAN
GDNS
PRISE
WAY
CLOSEDGE
BARTLE
ROAD
CO
WLIN
G
CLO
SE
LAN
D
BELL'S AL
SOTHERON
PL
GREEN
MO
NSO
N
LUS
HIN
G-
TON
RD
ALL
SO
ULS
'
ROAD
BRI
RD
DEPOT ROAD
CL
MA
CK
EN
ZIE
WHITE CITY
CL
LAU
RE
NC
E
RING
ST JAMES'S
ROAD
TER
ROAD
HIPPO
DR
OM
E
WESTVILLE
SW
EM
HIPPO-
PLACE
RICH-
CLARE-
ST
CROSS
FORD
ORO
UGH
MEW
S
KIN
GH
AM
DROME
HO
LLAN
D P
K
NDON
ST
HOLLAND
LANS-
GARDENS
ELG
INC
R
BLE
NH
EIM
CO
RN
WA
LL
OAKWOOD
SO
UTH
FIELD
COURT
ADDISON RD
RD
PETER'S
WO
RC
E-
DR
PETER'S
STER
ST ST
BLENHEIM RD
VILLAS
AVE
AP
PLE
-RO
AD
ROAD
SAM
UEL'
SCL
OSE
CRS
AVON-
ROAD
PE
MB
RO
KE
VILLA
S
FENELON
PL
MEWS
NEVERNPLACE
SQUARE
EARL'S
CO
UR
TR
OAD
DORCHESTER GVE
MAWSON
LANE
BO
ILE
AU
RO
AD
EVERDON
ROAD
PLACEKEBLE
Riverside
Studios
SQ
COOMER
ROAD
RD
SU
NR
D
SUN
MAY
ST
JOHN'S
WALHAM
YARD
ST MARKSGROVE
LANGTON ST
REDCLIFFE MEWS
AD
EFFIE
CLOSE
MARINEFIELD
MALTINGS PL
PARKHAM
STREET
GR
AN
FIELD
STR
EE
T
TROTT
ST
WHISTLERS AV
THOR NEY
CRES
FLOSSST
EP
RO
HT
NA
FS
T
WA
LKE
RP
L
HOTHAM ROAD
BO
RN
EO
ST
WES
THO
RPE
RD
LORE
STR
EE
T
DE
OD
OR
RO
AD
TERRACE
PIER
NE
WC
OM
EN
RD
PLO
UG
H R
OA
D
NORTH PASSAGE
SU
DLO
W
RO
AD
FIELD
BRAMBLE
GARDENS
JEDDO
MEWS
CR
CR
DOWNE
RISE
PK
PLACE
JOHN'S
GDNS
RD
BA
LLIOL R
D
BURY
AVE
SLEY
GEORGE
WICK
PO
RT
GLADETHE
INV
ER
ME
AD
CLO
SE
-H
CR
AT
C E
LA
D
CROWTHER
CLOSE
ELGIN CL
EMPRESS
APPROACH
GURNEYRD
HARWOOD
MEWS
IMPERIAL
CRESCENT
LE
RR
Y C
L
TE
KR
AM
LAN
E
MUNSTER
MEW
S
NORFOLK
TERR
ROSEWOOD
SQUARE
WA
LHA
M G
RE
EN
CO
UR
T
S'N
OSL
IW
DA
OR
SALT
ER
GA
LEN
A
GR
EE
NRODA
ANRD
DALE
SUNDEWCLOSE
JOSLINGSCLOSE
AS
KE
W C
RE
S
SOU
THW
AY
CLO
SE
TN
UH
CLOSE
QUEENSDALE
CRES
CASTLE CLOSE
BARBARA
RDJERVIS
PALEMEAD
CLOSE
THE
LEN
SB
UR
Y A
VE
NU
E
BOULEVARD
MILLSYARD
CROWN YD
CL
DAIRY CL
PLOUGH CLOSE
AMBER
WAY
S'DREHPEHS
ECALP HSUB
BOURBON
LANE
DERE CL
ERIN
CL
R O A D
LAN
E
CHISWICK
V A L E
EM
LYN
RO
AD
LAR
DE
N
AVE
T H E
WEST
VICT
ROAD
OLD
OAK
L A N
EO
L D
C O
M M
O N
O A
K
R O
A D
BAG
LANE
BRID
GE
R O
A D
SW
STER
MUN
RO
AD
GR
EE
NL
AN
E
PA
RS
ON
S
HO
ME
STE
AD
KELVEDO
N
RD
BAGLEY'S
LANE
PUTN
EY
RICHMOND
ROAD
ROAD
PUTNEY
HIGH
BRIDGE
WAY
P A L
R O A D
F U L H
A M
L I L L I E
BR
IDG
EW
AN
DS
WO
RTH
F U
R O
RO
AD
K I N
G 'S
STREET
PUTN
EY
BRID
GE
PUTN
EY
APPR
OACH
N E W
R O A D
FULHAM
FULHAMHIG
H
R O A D
ROAD
N E W
K I N G ' S
RO
AD
TOWNMEAD
BR
IDG
E
WA
ND
SW
OR
TH
DAWES
R O A
D
DAWES
L I L L I E
MU
NS
F U L H A M
ROAD
R O A D
ROAD
K I N G
' S
IMPERIAL
RO
AD
TO
WN
ME
AD
ROAD
RO
AD
R O
LOTS
RO
AD
CHEYNE
BR
IDG
EN
DR
OA
D
TRIN
ITY R
OA
D
STRE
ET
TALGARTH
ROAD
SH
EP
HE
K I N G
K I N G
ROAD
U X B R I D G ER O
WELL
D O
O W
ROAD
RO
AD
STU
DLA
ND
ST
GREYHOUND
BLYTHE
GDNS
ADDISON
ROAD
BECKLOW
ROAD
CO
NIN
GH
AM
RO
AD
HOUNDGREY
ROAD
ROAD
STAR
RO
AD
RD
LOWER ADDISON
ADD
AD
DIS
ON
PADD
H O L L A N D
H O L L A N D
W E S T W A Y
HIGH ROAD
RO
AD
H A M
M E R
S M I T H
HAM
MER
SMIT
H
BRID
GE
HAM
MER
SMIT
H
S T R
G R E A T W E S T
GOLD
WICK
ROAD
ENS
R O A D
GLENTHORNE
D A
L L
I N
G
ROAD
D A O
R
P A L A
BRIDGE
QUEEN
CARO
LINE
BEADONROAD
ROAD
TEERTS
F
HAMMERSMITH
BUTTERWICK
G R O
V E
HS
UB
RO
AD
H A M M E R S M I T HA S K E W
O L D
R O
A D
O A
K
R O
WO
OD
B L O
E M
F O
N T
E I N
U X B R
R O A D
D A
O R
C A N ED U
R O A D
SHEPHERD'S
BUSH
E N
A L
GREEN
A 3 2 2 0
LAN
E
L I L L I E
R O A D
ROAD
NORTH
END
RO
AD
R O A D
R O A D
W A R W
I C K
NO
RTH
WEST
RO
AD
EN
D
CROM
KENSINGTON
HIGHSTREET
OLDBROMPTON
R O A D
WESTCROMWELL ROAD
W A R W I C K
R O A D
ROAD
A V E N U E
S T R E E T
P A R K
NIGHT
RD
HARLESDEN
TUBBS ROAD
HIGH
STREET
SCR
UBS
LANE
HARROW
SC
RU
BS
LAN
E
ROAD
ROADHAR
S'D
REHPE
HSBU
SHDA
OR
O L D
O A
KC
O M
M O
NL A
N E
HAMMERFLYOVER
NO
RTH
RO
AD
EN
D
ERN
I D G EA D
ROW
ORIA
A M
ISON
TE
R
A C E
A D
LEY'S
E E T
DON
AN
HAWK
RD
'S
W A YW E S T
SMITH
A D
NUE
WALK
A D
L H
ROAD
INGALE
GARDENS
GDNS
ADDISON
A S K E WBROADWAY
PA
RS
ON
S
LOWER
GO
LDH
AWK
GR
EE
N
U LH A
M
C E
of BrentLondon Borough
Estate
EstateClem Attlee
GardensFlora
House
Ow
enR
obert
GreenEstate
Burne JonesHouse
LinacreCourt
Guinness
PeabodyEstate
Est
ate
Quee
n C
aroline
Em
lyn
Gardens
Woodford
Court
CourtBush
Gibbs
MARCUSGARVEYPARK
SwanWharf WillowbankWharf
eg
dirbt
oo
F
CarraraBank Wharf
HospitalLouise
Princess
HospitalHammersmith
Charing
Hospital
Cross
TheRavenscourt Park
Hospital
Chelsea
Ground
Football
Stadium
Linford
Q P RFootballGround
Fulham
Football
Ground
Christie
CentreBroadway
Earls CourtExhibitionBuilding
Empress
Building
Olympia
PALACEFULHAM
BBCTelevisionCentre
Scrubs
Old Oak
Sidings
Sidings
North Pole International Depot
Old Oak Common
H.M. Prison
Wormwood
Apollo
Kings Mall
SulivanEnterprise Centre
FulhamPools
State
ThamesWaterTower
LyricSquare
WestfieldLondon
CHISWICK HIGH ROAD
G R E AT W E S T R O A D
WELLESLEY ROAD
option 1
option 2
option 3
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 1 7
The start and end of a tunnel is known as a portal and it is at these portal locations that construction and operational matters are felt. Portals require a section of cutting, approximately 200m in length, followed by a structure to house ventilation equipment. This structure could be made integral to any redevelopment as has been the case in other tunnels.
There was a clear preference for the western portal at Hogarth roundabout and the eastern portal
at Warwick Road. A tunnel linking these two sites would be over two miles long and bypass a number of north-south routes that currently link to the A4. There was relatively low support for a short tunnel starting
Question 2If you support a tunnel replacement, or ‘flyunder’, where do you think it should start and end?
and ending in a similar manner to the current flyover. Despite this low support, a tunnel based on these start and end points was tested as it was likely to be the least expensive and disruptive.
32%
25% 8%
11%16%8%
sHeP
Herd
s BUs
H ro
ad
HaMM
ersM
itH ro
ad
Cast
lena
U roa
d
grea
t CHe
rtse
y roa
d
fUlH
aM Pa
laCe
roa
d
WarWiCK road
a4 great West road a4 great West road
1 8 HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study
Very few tunnels have junctions with other routes. An example an exception is the Limehouse Link tunnel in east London that has a underground junction to allow eastbound traffic to turn off to Canary Wharf and for Canary Wharf traffic to join the westbound flow.
one of the feasibility study terms of reference was to examine the implications of linking the main A4 tunnel to north-south routes. only a small selection of these were offered in the multiple choice question including those around Hammersmith Gyratory which would likely become the mid-point of the tunnel and north-south routes at both western and eastern portal locations.
Two different approaches were taken to junction testing as part of the feasibility study. This was based on both the feedback above and the subsequent traffic analysis that was carried out under another of the study’s terms of reference.
Question 3Should the flyunder connect to any north-south links?
LBHF
A4 Flyunder
PAGE 17
Chapter
Meters ±North
0 100m 250m 500m 1km
Figure 14: Masterplanning - Reconnecting Hammersmith
New direct north - south routes
Linking two public spaces
02Masterplanning - Reconnecting Hammersmith
Current route A4 layout changes
LBHF
A4 Flyunder
PAGE 17
Chapter
Meters ±North
0 100m 250m 500m 1km
Figure 14: Masterplanning - Reconnecting Hammersmith
New direct north - south routes
Linking two public spaces
02Masterplanning - Reconnecting Hammersmith
Current route A4 layout changes
Current one-way routes returning to two-way traffic
new direct north-south routes
new east-west connections
agree
20%strongly disagree
9%
disagree
10%
indifferent
36%strongly
agree
26%
one of the WLLD objectives for creating a tunnel for the A4 is to improve the urban environment in Hammersmith town centre. Given that currently two traffic systems dominate the town centre - the flyover and the gyratory - this question sought to establish what importance they play in the degradation of the town centre.
As can be seen from the results, almost half of respondents believed that the gyratory should work in two directions if possible. However, the remaining respondents did not consider this to be a priority.
The Hammersmith Gyratory performs a complex function in the local
and strategic road network and surrounds the key public transport interchange requiring a number of crossings which delay both traffic and pedestrian movement.
TfL, over the last few years, has removed similar gyratory systems to the benefit of all road users, returning
them to two-way working. Their current work programme includes gyratories in Wandsworth and Vauxhall Cross, as well as new studies for Stoke Newington, Swiss Cottage, Aldgate and Archway.
Question 4Do you think opportunities should be exploited to return Hammersmith Gyratory to two-way working?
MALL
noise
18%
river severenCe
20%
visUal intrUsion
20%
toWn Centre severenCe
16%
otHer
6%air qUality
19%
2 0 HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study
The five options provided as answers to this question were taken directly from the RTF and WLLD reports. It should be noted that network performance (i.e. congestion and subsequent delay) is not listed as one of the current problems. TfL data shows that this stretch of strategic road performs better than most.
of the five options offered there was a balanced response with equal support for the resolution of the problems of air quality, noise, visual intrusion, town centre severance and river severance.
For the other responses a lack of housing was seen as a problem that a tunnel could overcome, as was neighbourhood connectivity and local road congestion.
The manner to which a number of tunnel alignments can address these problems is compared later in this report. It is apparent that some of these problems can be reduced, whereas others could be replaced or relocated.
Question 5What are the current problems that you would like to see the flyunder overcome?
otHer 12%
Cost 20%
a4 ClosUre dUring ConstrUCtion 19%
ConstrUCtion lorry traffiC
15%traffiC diverting to loCal roads 34%
£
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 2 1
Four major concerns, based on the experience of other major road and infrastructure projects, were considered to be relevant to a tunnel replacement along the A4. These related to both the construction period of the tunnel and its subsequent opening and operation.
The biggest concern was the issue of traffic not using a tunnel and diverting onto other routes. This is likely to have been due to the existing congestion and delay on the borough’s local road network. This issue is explored in more detail in this report as are the other concerns which are all functions of the tunnel’s construction.
Cost was the next biggest concern which is understandable given the figures quoted in the evening Standard newspaper, which were reported as running into the ‘hundreds of millions’. The disruption caused to the A4 itself during construction and the number of lorries required were as much of a concern and the study has attempted to assign scales of impact based on various tunnel lengths and construction methodologies.
Question 6What are your main concerns for a flyunder?
other concerns range from overrunning construction cost and time, the underground cutting, how to deal with car breakdowns and exhaust fumes, the perception that it will never happen and that’s it is too ambitious as a scheme.
West London Link Design in association with the Halcrow Group and Hammersmith BID
A TUNNEL TO REPLACE THE HAMMERSMITH FLYOVER: A CHAIN OF OPPORTUNITIES
We can transform a six lane swathe of tarmac into a site for housing, community buildings and workplaces, linking previously severed riverside streets to the rest of the Borough.
There is opportunity to repair the townscape with buildings sympathetic to their environment and turn the highway into a linear suburb.
FROM TARMAC TO TOWNSCAPE
Proposed View of the A4
CHISWICK
HAMMERSMITH
EARLS COURT
Current View
CHISWICK HAMMERSMITH EARL’S COURT
MA MALLLL22%
22%21%
7%7%
7%
14%
oPen sP
aCe
ConneCtions to tHe riverrelief road for
King stree tsHoP
s
HoUsing
offiCes
leisUre and
CoMMUnity Use s
2 2 HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study
Question 7What should any land freed up by the removal of the flyover be used for?
one of the terms of reference for the study was
To consider the nature, extent and potential value of any released surface land, bearing in mind existing planning policies and any potential from varied planning policies.
With the flyover removed, land would be released for a variety of uses, some that would generate
value to possibly fund the construction of the tunnel. The stated preference to this question was for the land to be kept public, rather than to be developed, which formed the basis of the WLLD work. The masterplan work done as part of the study utilised the responses to this question to generate a suitable development scheme and therefore income balanced against the need and request for additional urban open space in Hammersmith town centre and along the A4 corridor.
taXation nationWide
21%
taXation london-Wide
17%
taXation H&f residents
5%
otHer
3%
User toll
19%
oversite develoPMent
35%
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 2 3
Question 8How should the flyunder be paid for?
Any tunnel project would require a substantial, innovative and multi-source financing model. This question was designed to tease out the local appetite for a number of financing methods. A third of respondents supported oversite development to fund the tunnel which supports the masterplan work done as part of the study.
Almost half of respondents supported taxation as a method for collecting funding, with half of those considering a national tax as the most suitable idea. This confirms the opinion of the strategic nature of this project and of the next stages of feasibility study.
Surprisingly 19 per cent of respondents supported a user toll on the tunnel to help finance the project. While this is a common feature in europe, toll roads in the UK are limited to the central London congestion charge zone, the M6 and a few tunnels and bridges. There are a number of economic, environmental and political issues around toll roads which are touched upon in the funding section of this report.
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 2 5
BoRoUGH LeTTeRS
Brendon Walsh Regeneration, Economic Development and Environment Department
Dear Cllr Botterill,
London Borough of Hounslow (LBH) welcomes the London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulhamʼs (LBH&F) bold and transformative vision for a ʻflyunderʼ in order to remove the severance caused by the Transport for London (TfL) road network around Hammersmith and Chiswick. The part of the A4 considered forms a perceptual and physical barrier between Chiswick High Road and the important amenity and heritage sites of the Thames, Dukes Meadows and Chiswick House & Gardens. It is also responsible for significant noise and air pollution, reducing the quality of life for those living nearby and depressing property values; opportunity for investment and development; and the local economy.
We therefore whole-heartedly support the principle of taking the main east-west artery underground and replacing it at surface with a local network, using the space freed for enabling development which is both imaginative and sympathetic in style and scope to integrate with the existing built form.
We now discuss the technical solution and the enabling development issues in turn.
In regards to the technical solution, we note that you have investigated various options for achieving this outcome, from a straight ʻcut & coverʼ replacement for the existing flyover in your borough and just into our borough east of Hogarth roundabout, to something more ambitious, involving a longer bored tunnel linking Chiswick to the vicinity of Earls Court. Clearly a longer bored tunnel helps spread the benefits of the project and it is tempting for us to push for such a tunnel to be taken even further west to replace the M4 elevated section through Brentford. However we understand that a large proportion of traffic using these roads is local. Without a series of complicated ramps and ʻportalsʼ providing access to a new underground highway - structures that would result in loss of property (some likely to be listed or of conservation value) and land area and act to simply displace severance - this traffic is likely to be re-diverted onto the existing network (or the proposed replacement streets). The benefits of the scheme, and indeed the total number of users, may therefore be insufficient to warrant the huge cost.
Cllr Nicholas Botterill London Borough of Hammersmith & FulhamTown Hall King StreetLondon W6 9JU
Regeneration, Economic Development and Environment Department Civic CentreLampton RoadHounslow TW3 4DN Your contact: Mark Frost Direct Line: 020 8583 5037 E-Mail: [email protected]
Our ref: Hammersmith FlyunderDate: 28 February 2014
At this stage, and based on the assessments provided to date, we remain 'solution blind' as long as our objectives for reducing severance, improving amenity and protecting heritage in Chiswick are observed.
On the face of it would seem that a ʻcut & coverʼ like for like replacement of the flyover extending to Hogarth roundabout may provide the best business case. Should this project be formally taken up by LBH&F or TfL to investigate further we would also like the assessment to give due consideration to whether such a structure could be extended as far as the Hogarth roundabout, or indeed further towards Sutton Court Road, assuming there was a technical solution to ensure appropriate connectivity with traffic coming from the A316 was retained. We note that if this connectivity is not provided, based on the current traffic data presented, it is likely that the replacement local network on the surface would still need to be of a relatively high capacity to deal with vehicles from the A316 which may negate the benefit of the whole scheme.
In regards to enabling development we are broadly speaking in favour of the quantumʼs you suggest within our borough, however much work would need to be done to ensure the design is of a high quality and complements the existing built form and urban grain. The Council has recently completed extensive Context and Character studies which will be useful in assisting the assessment of potential.
Yours sincerely,
Cllr Steve Curran Lead Member for planning, property, regeneration and housing
Cllr Ed Mayne, Lead Member Community Safety and Regulatory Services London Borough of Hounslow
2 6 HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 2 7
Illustrative view looking view looking east to St. Paul’s Green.
C
CC
C
T
T
L
L
L
L
L
L
H
H
H
H
H
H
HH
H
H
H
E S
T H
A M
E RR I V
MERRIV THA ES
BATT
ERSEA
REACH
RIV
ER
WA
ND
LE
Chelsea
Harbour
GRAND
UN
ION
CANAL
FulhamBroadway
West Kensington
PutneyBridge
ParsonsGreen
Kensal Green
White City
Goldhawk
East Acton
Hammer-smith
ParkRavenscourt
StamfordBrook
Baron's Court
EarlsCourt
Latimer
Shepherd'sBush
Road
Road
Ham-mersmith
WillesdenJunction
Shepherd'sBush
Kensington(Olympia)
ImperialWharf
WestBrompton
TurnhamGreen
WoodLane
Market
Fulham
Hall
Town HallHammersmith
Town
National Rail
National R
ail
Distric
t Line
National R
ail
National R
ail
Hammersmith
& City
Line
Central line
District Line
District Line
TheQueen's
Club
GardensFurnivall
Brompton
Cemetery
EelBrook
Common
Park
South
Park
Hurlingham
Cemetery
Kensal Green
Cemetery
Little
Scrubs
ParkParkWormholt
Wormwood
Fulham
ParkRavenscourt
Bishops Park
Cemetery
CemeteryHammersmith
The Warren
Normand Park
Common
ParkCathnor
ParkWendell
St. Mary's
WORMWOOD SCRUBS
Hammersmith
ParsonsGreen
Shepherd's Bush
Chis
wic
k Eyo
t
S
SS
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
SS
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
REVO
R
RO
ST-
HA
RTS
WO
OD
JEDDO
KINNEAR RD
RDSWAINSON
TH
IRD
B R A Y B R O O KW U
L F S T A
N
ERCONWALD
FITZNEAL
RD
SOUTHFIELD
BLENHEIM RD
ADDISON GR
AB
ING
ER
FA
IRF
AX
PR
IOR
YA
V
WHELLOCKRD
BLANDFORD
WO
OD
STO
CK
RO
AD
RD
FLANDERS
BATH
RD
RO
MA
N
ROAD
RD
LON
SD
ALE
RO
AD
WENDELL
MA
PL
E
RD
RE
CH
T
MULTI
WARPLE
WAY
PK MSESSEX
BEECH
AV
AVE
HO
LL
EY
RD
LE
FR
OY
RD
MA
YF
IEL
D R
D
COBBOLD AY
LME
R
V A L E T T A
AG
NE
S
RD
RO
AD
CT
GLE
ND
UN
BR
OM
YA
RD
BOWES ROAD
RD
GLE
ND
UN
ASHFIELD
AV
EN
UE
TRINITY
OL
D O
AK
LAN
EN
OM
MO
C
MUIR
BRASSIE
FAIRWAY
DRIVE
RO
AD
BRASSIE
AV
KIN
GS
DO
WN
HO
YLA
KE
AVE AN
DR
EW
'SS
TR
OA
D
THE
LONG
MA
SH
IE
RD
GR
NT
AY
LO
R'S
BY
ET
HE
THE GREEN
SUNNINGDALE
AV
E
AVE
FOLIOT
WAY
MAY-
ROAD
MID
LAN
D
CHANDOS RD
TELFORD
BRUNEL RD
WE
LLS
HO
US
E R
D
WAY
EC
AR
RE
T
ROAD
AT
LA
S
STE
PH
EN
SO
N
ST
GO
OD
HA
LLST
NORTH POLE
WA
LLING
FOR
D
RDSNARSGATE
HIG
HLE
VE
R
CH
ES
TNU
T
ALLE
Y
MERTHYR
TER
TER
ROSEDEW
COLWITH
R A
N N
O C
H
ROAD
EV
ER
ING
TON
SEDLESCOMBERO
AD
RO
AD
CLO
SE
CR
AM
MO
ND
RO
AD
MU
LGR
AV
E
TAM
WO
RTH
ST
ROAD
RO
AD
RO
AD
R O
A D
WESTBRIDGE
BA
CRESCENT
ROAD
ROAD
MONTSERRAT
RO
AD
OX
FOR
D
ST
ESMOND
WIN
TH
OR
PE
RD
WA
DH
AM
RO
AD
ROAD
BE
PL
BE
CTI
VE
RD
BR
AN
DLE
HO
W
DR
LLIGL
EK
S
ROADPARKFAWE
NO
RT
HF
IELD
S
PL
EA
SA
NT
PO
INT
RO
AD
WA
Y
ENTERPRISE
OSIERS
CRESCENT
VIC
AR
AG
E
VICARAGE
GWYNNE
RO
AD
NO
TR
EVL
EY
RD
HA
RR
OW
AY
HOLMAN RD
LOM
BA
RD
RO
AD
ROAD
YO
RK
BR
IDG
ES
CO
UR
T
HOLGATE AVE
CLOSE
WAL
LIS
ST
HIBBERT
HO
PE
STREET
YORK
PLACE
PLAC
E
YORK
WAY
GAR
TON
S
CHATFIELD RD
MENDIPRD
ROAD WYNTER
STREET
USKRO
AD
CLOSE
NANTES
CLO
SE
GARRICK
CLOSE
CLO
SE
TUR
EN
E
CLO
SE
BA
RTH
OLO
ME
W
COLEFORD RD
ST
TON
SLE
Y
HILL
TON
SLE
Y
RO
AD
STM
OR
IES
TE
DG
EL
ST
EBNER RD
RD
BIR
DH
UR
ST
DE
MP
ST
ER
RD
SQMARRYAT
FU
LHA
M
RO
AD
SETTRINGTON
PLA
ST
CL
THO
RN
DIK
E
RO
AD
PETERBORO
UGH
CLOSE
PA
RK
GDS
VILLE
RO
BE
RTS
ST
ME
WS
SO
UTH
ST MARKS C
L
CRABTREE
CHILDERLEY
ST
KINGWOOD
STRODE
PARK
STREET
CREFIELD
CL
WO
OD
LAWN
GRESWELL STREET
RO
AD
DA
NE
ME
RE
RD
RO
SK
ELL
AS
HLO
NE
FE
ST
ING
ST
RO
AD
E M
B A
N K
M E
N T
RUVIGNY
BE
MIS
HFELSHAM
CH
AR
LWO
OD
RE
DG
RA
VE
RD
RD
BENDEMEER
JACKSON
HE
NR
Y
RD
SA
LVIN
RD
RO
TH
ER
WO
OD
RD
GLA
DW
YN
ST
GLE
ND
AR
VO
N
WE
ISS
RDR
OW
BIG
G'S
KINGS-
ST
WAT
ERM
AN
MA
SC
OT
TE
GW
ALI
OR
RD
RD
ROAD CLO
SEM
ER
E
GD
S
RD
RO
ELLERBY
DONERAILE
T H
E
RD
FINLAY
BISHOP'S
BISHO
P'S
CLONCURRY
RO
AD
STREET
STREET
NA
GE
ST
EV
E
LANGTHORNE
QUEENSMILL
WO
OD
LAW
N
LYSIA
LARNACH
NELLA
RO
AD
RO
AD
ETERNIT
WALK
CLO
SE
MILLS
HO
TT
CLOSEROWBERRY
WHEATSHEAF
MEADOWBANK
CLOSE
HO
LY
LANE
BOWFELLRDSKELWITH
RA
INV
ILLE
WINGRAVE
PE
TLE
Y
RD
RD
STREET
INGLETHORPE
HARBORD
KENYON
STREET
RO
AD
NITON
STREET
ROAD
STREET
STREET
STREET
STREET
STREETATALANTA
DELORME
AVERILL
ROAD
ROAD
SILVERTONELLALINE
R O
A D
ROAD
LANE
BOTHWELL
STREETHAW
KSMOOR
STREET
STREET
STREET ST
CLOSEADENEY
ANCILL
ROAD
ROAD
ALTHEA ST
STMEAD
RD
CAMBRIA
WANDON RD
FORD
ACKMAR R
D
ELTHIRON RD
BASUTO
WHITTINGSTALL
VERA RO
ADGOWAN
ROAD
RO
AD
ROAD
ROAD
LINV
ER
AT
NE
Y R
OA
D
DE
OD
ARFL
OR
IAN
RD
ROAD
FULH
AM
RDDURRELL
ROAD
CLOSE
STEEPLE
BU
RS
TO
CK
RD
ST
WEI
MAR
BR
EW
HO
US
E
DEODAR
ME
RIV
ALE
RO
AD
RO
AD
STH
IGH
WILLOWBANK
GATE
CHURCH
STVILLEGON-
RANELAGH
AP
PR
STATION
WALD
EMAR
EDGARLEY
TER
AVENUE
ROADCOLEHILL
GDNS
KIM
BE
LL GS
FIRTH
GS
CO
LEH
ILL
RIGAULT
BU
RLIN
GTO
N
BUER
RO
AD
PLACE
BURLINGTON
COMBERIN
GMERBURNFOOT
OXBER
RY
HORDER
RDD
OR
NC
LIFFE
AV
GARDENS
GDNS
HURLINGHAM
ED
EN
HU
RS
T
NA
PIE
RRA
NE
LAG
H
CROOKHAM ROAD
MIM
OSA STREET
LETT
ICE
LAUR
EL
RD
LANDRIDGE
FULH
AM
GD
HURLINGHAM
GR
IM
ELYSIUM
RD
RD
RD
PARK
FO
SK
ET
T
EWA
DO
LBY
AV
RD
EU
NE
VA
PK
RD
STR
EE
T
NS
DANCER ROAD
BETTRIDGE
CO
RT
AY
NE
ASHINGTO
NRO
AD
CR
ISTO
WE
BANK
RD RO
AD
ALD
ER
VILLE
ROAD
RD
HEATH
ED
DIS
CO
MB
E
DIONIS
RD
ST
ROAD
STREET
DORIA
GU
ION
RO
AD
ROAD
PERRYMS
TRE
ET
CT
DAISY
SULI
SULIVAN
LAN
E
CARNWATH
LANE
FORDM
OLES-
PE
TE
RB
OR
OU
GH
CO
NIG
ER
BR
OO
MH
OU
SE
MEWSBOROUGHPETER-
BR
OO
MH
OU
SE
RO
AD
RO
AD
IRENE
DELVIN
O
RD
DIN
GS
TON
E
ST
CLAN
STUDDRIDGE
RO
AD
ST
CARTY
ST
QU
AR
RE
ND
ON
BR
AD
BO
UR
NE
CHID
CRONDACEROAD
RD
CHIPS
RO
AD
RD
ROSEBURYSTE
PHEN
DALE
WOOLNEIGH
HUGON
SQPHILPOT
RO
AD
DYM
OC
K
ST
BR
EE
R
STR
EE
TS
TRE
ET
ROAD
ROAD
DEM
ORG
AN RD
HAMBLE
HAZLEBURY
SANDILANDS
INGDON
BELTRAN
STASHCOMBE
STNARBOROUGH
STFRISTON
ROAD
RD
RCH
RYECROFT
STREET
BO
WE
RD
EA
N S
T
EA
D
STR
EE
T
ST
OK
EN
ST
CHU
ST
BOV
RD
AC
FO
LD
RD
BROU
RDSNOWBURY
KBURY RD
CR
AN
BU
RY
RD
OA
ROAD
FU
RN
ES
S
GILSTEAD
PEARSCROFT
RDRD
COURT
RSCROFT
PEA-RD
CLOSE
WAITE
ROAD
SWIFT ST
FILM
ER
FERNHURST ROAD
ST
PETER'S
ESTCOURTPROTHEROMENDORA
ROAD CHALDON
AINTREEROADHANNELL
ROAD
RO
AD
SID
BU
RY
STLAMBROOK
WARDO
ST
TER
DANEHURST
WYFOLD
ALLESTREE ROADROWALLAN ROAD
ROADMABLETHORPEBRONSART ROAD
BR
ON
SA
RT
ROADKILMAINE ROAD
ROAD
REPORTON
AVENUE
AVENUE
STREET
BISHOP'S
LANE
ROAD
STOLAF'S
STREET
ORBAINSHERBROOKE
ROSALINE
VA
RN
A
ROADROAD
ROAD
RO
AD
BEDFORD PS
HU
MB
OLT
RO
AD
HUMBOLT ROAD
DISBROWE
WK
CAR
OLIN
EA
BB
EY
LAU
ND
RY
RD
RC
CL
PU
RC
ELL
RD
BA
YO
NN
E
BRECON RD
LAMPETER
GDNS
PE
LLAN
T
ROAD
MO
YLA
N R
OA
D
ROAD
BRECON
ROAD DELAFORD
TILTON
TOURNAY
ST. THOMAS'S W
AY
HA
RTIS
ME
RE
FA
BIA
N R
OA
D
ROAD
RO
AD
ROAD
OP'S
WIN
CH
END
ON
MIR
AB
EL R
OA
D
BLO
OM
PA
RK
TERMARVILLE
CH
ES
ILTON
RO
STR
EV
OR
FELD
EN
ROAD
RO
AD
RO
AD
MEW
S
RO
AD
RA
DIP
OLE
BISH
LILYV
ILLE
BROOKVILLEROSAVILLE
PARKVILLE
ROAD
LETTER-
STONE
RO
AD
RD
RO
AD
ROAD
ROAD
ROAD
RO
AD
DARLAN
RO
ADR
OA
DST M
AUR
ROAD
CLO
NM
EL
EPPLE
PLACEBRID
GES
CROSS
ROAD
ROAD
SHORROLDS
E RD
BURNTH
EPIRU
S
RO
AD
RY
LSTO
N
STREET
ROAD
ST
ROAD
COOMER PL
HALDANE
COOMER
MEWS
KEMPSON
AV
EHARW
OOD
MOORE
MSEPIRUS
FARM
CAMPANA
BA
RC
LAY
CL
JERDAN
NOVELLO
SHOTTENDANE
DOWN
HARBLE
RD
RDELMS RD
PLACE
FIELD
HECK-ROAD
ROAD
PULTON
BARCLAY
CASSIDYROAD
VANSTON
PARTHENIA
ST
RD
RD
RD
FAV
ROAD
RM
US
G
AR
GO
N
RD
MS
EFFIE
PLACE
BROADWAY
FULHAM
RD
ANSELM
EUSTACERD
ARMADALE
HALFORD
ROAD
ROAD
RACTON
RD
KN
IVE
TT
RD
WALHAM
ROADROAD
LANE
LANE
GROVE
FARM
RD
MIC
KLE
THW
AITE
STREET
BILLI
NG
RD
AVALON RD
HARWOOD
HILARY
RDTYRAW
LEY
BLAKE
CRES
RD
GDS
BOROUGH
PETER-
VILLA
S
ROAD
WANSDOWN
WA
TER
FOR
D
CE
DA
RN
E
RD
PLACE
BR
ITA
NN
IA
PARK
LOR
D
IMP
RO
WED
MICHAEL
TER
MELD
ON
CHERYLS
CL
CLOSE
ROAD
WAY
BRITANNIA
RO
AD
EMD
EN
SQ
RIALE
ST
SANDS END LANE
ITH
ST
RD
RUMBOLD RD
ROAD
WKLENODAN
WELL
MA
X
HOLMEAD RD
CR
ESCEN
T
PARK
BROMPTON
BILLING RD
PL
BILLI
NG
MO
RR
IS
EDENVALE ST
WILLIAM
ST
CHARLOW
CL
LANE
WATERMEADOW
PO
TTE
RS
STEPHENDALE
LINDROP ST
ST
QU
ER
RIN
BYAM
GLENROSA ST
RO
AD
KIL
RD
ST
ST
TYNEMOUTH ST
ELBE
RO
AD
RD
ST
ELSW
ICK
MAL
TIN
GS
STREET
RO
AD
WAY
Pier
Chelsea
Harbour
GR
OVE
ASHBURNHAM
STADIUM
GR
OVE
UP
CE
RN
E
TETC
OTTST
STFORD
SAND
-
REWELL
TETC
OTT
RD
RO
AD
LOTS
Chelsea
RO
AD
BURNABY
UV
ER
DA
LETA
DE
MA
RO
AD
RD
TERDAMER
FERN
SHAW
HO
RTEN
SIA
GU
NTER
EDITH TER
RDED
ITH
WharfChelsea
Creek
Wharf
ROAD
CREMORNE RD
RD
ST
Cremorne
AVENUE
HAR
BOU
R
HARBOUR DR
CH
ELSEA
SQUARE
ADMIRAL
THAMES AVE
PODMORE ROAD
ALM
A DIGHTONRD
BR
AM
FOR
D R
D
DA
LBY
RD
BA
LLAN
TIN
E S
T
YORK
ELTRINGHAM
PETERGATE
MARL RD
FERRIER ST
SMUGGLERS WAY
SMU
GG
LERS
OLD
YO
RK
RO
AD
MAYNARD C
L
GWYNCLOSE
JEW
SROW
ROAD
AVENUE
AVENUE
AVENUE
AV
EN
UE
AV
EN
UE
ROAD
HURLINGHAM
SQUARE
WILL
IAM
BURY
MS
R'S
ALLE
Y
WHEAT-
SHEAF
TERR
PALACEMEWS
CLARE
MWS
BROUGHTON
RD APPROACH
MU
STO
W
ST
ELYSIU
M P
L
MS
BR
AN
KS
EA
GRAN-
PLACE
MELBRAY
MS
LALOR ST
EXETER
MEW
S
JOHN
AVENUE
INGRAMMARGARET
CLOSE
PL
LEN
HU
GH
DALTON
AVE
HUGH
CL
GA
ITS
KE
LL
SW
AN
MS
WALK
BOLING
BROKE
LAN
E
SUNBU
ROAD
CHURCH
BA
TTE
RS
EA
ROAD
ST
RE
ET
HIG
H
ROAD
ELLI
VR
O
TCE
ROAD
ROAD
WORLIDGE ST
IMRE CL
ALDENSLEY
RD
LILY
ST
BROOK
HEM
OLD
CLOSEPARNELL
ELG
IN
AV
E
SIDE RDGREEN-
CREIGHTON
STREET
BEAUFORT
MS
TELEPHONE
PL
LANFREYPL
CHEESEMANS
ELSHAM
HOFLAND
UPPER ADDIS
ONLORNE
CRE
PL
Q U E E N S D A L E
GDS
MARY
ST ALBAN'SCHELMSFORD
ROAD
DN
OM
HCI
R
ROADROADANLEY RDS
YC
AM
OR
E
FIE
LD R
DL
EY
S-
WE
ST
VIL
LE R
OA
D
RY
LET
T
AS
HHURCHBASSEIN
PA
RK
CT
RAVENS-
LION
STAM
ME
RT
ON
AV
RD
GA
INS
BO
RO
UG
H
AV
EN
UE
RO
AD
BR
ITIS
H
AIR
ED
ALE
CL
EV
EL
AN
D A
V
NE
TH
ER
AV
ON
EV
OR
G
NOI
L
S'R
ET
EP
TS
SQ
UA
RE
QS
S'R
ET
EP
TS
ST PETER'S SQ
GS
MAL
L
GR
BRITISH
EY
OT
BERESTEDE
RD
GS
EY
OT
GS
TERHAMMERSMITH
VERBENA
LA
SQUARE
CROFT
SQ
MS
EV
OR
GBLACK LION
BR
OO
K
VAUGHAN AV
BROOKRDPALGRAVE
SOUTH
PR
EB
EN
D
FORD
PLE
YD
ELL
AV
SIDE
ST
AM
FO
RD
FL
MS
CO
S
BALMORAL
RO
AD
FO
BINDEN
CL
GDNS
STAMFORD
RA
VE
NS
CO
UR
T
OURT
AV
EN
UE
SQ
UA
RE
TERASHC
CRESCENT
ROAD
RD
RD
RO
AD
VILLA
SA
SH
CH
UR
CH
AMOR
RO
AD
KILMARSH
LONSDALE
RD
GLENTHAM
LILLIAN
ARUROAD
DR
S'A
DLI
H T
S
OADR
AV
RIVERVIEWCLAVE
GDNS
TR
UO
CS
NE
VA
R
UPPER
LA
NEST PETER'S
SO
UT
H
CO
UR
TR
DSAM
ELS PLACENAPIERLORD
LAN
EO
IL M
ILL
GDS
THERESA RHSI
DN
AT
S
ST
S'R
ET
EP
HAMLET
HA
ML
ET
GD
S
RO
VA
EB
PA
RK
RIV
ER
CO
UR
T
RO
AD
RO
AD
MALL
EC
AL
P
TR
UO
CN
EV
WE
LTJE
RA
VE
NS
-
AV
E
CO
UR
TE
NA
L G
OH
ERI
HS
PM
AH
RAVENSCOURT
PLACE
SID
EE
N
RA
VE
NS
CO
UR
T
GARDENS
SQ
GR
.
CH
UR
CH
GD
SK
ELM
SC
OT
T
RO
AD
DO
RV
ILLE
WIN
GA
TE
WELLESLEY
AV
RD
CR
LAM
ING
TO
N
REDMORE RD
RO
AD
CA
MB
RID
GE
GLENTHORNE
LOWER
RIVERSIDE
NIG
EL
GDS
MS
ET
AGL
EF
NIG
EL
PLA
YFA
IR
EV
A RI
AF
YAL
P
VA
LLE
WM
OR
C
ALBION
PL
HO
L-
ST
CO
MB
E
DR
MEWS
AV
E
BR
IDG
E
MA
CB
ET
H
GAR
DENS
MALL
GVE
RUTLAND
MA
LLR
D
WEI
VE
GDI
RB
PLACE
GR
OV
E
AR
GY
LEP
L
DOWN
AS
PE
NP
LD
IME
S
ST
RE
ET
LE
AM
OR
E S
TR
EE
T
BRACKENBURY
BENBOW
BA
NIM
PERRERS
RAYNHAM
ATWOOD
RD
FURBER
DA
LLIN
G ST
RE
ET
ST
BR
AD
MO
RE
PK
RD
RO
AD
ST
RE
ET
RO
AD
CA
RD
RO
SS
NA
SM
YT
H
AD
RO
AD
CA
RT
HE
WB
RA
CK
EN
BU
RY
HEBRON
RO
BA
T
RO
AD
RO
AD
ROAD
SO
UT
HE
RT
ON
IFF
LEY
RD
ADIE
MARCO
RD
RD
IFF
LEY
CARTHEW
COULTER
VILLAS
GDNS
BEAUCLERC
ROAD
AG
AT
E
RD
GS
ROAD
ST JAMES
BERYL
PARFREY STREET
ST DUNSTAN'S
CHANCELLOR'SST
RD
LOCHALINE
WINSLOW
DIS
TILLER
Y R
D
ROAD
STP
LAY
FAIR
CLA
YB
RO
OK
MAR
GR
AVINE
ROADASPENLEA
GASTEIN
CLAXTON
RDLU
RG
AN
AV
RD
GROVE
CLOSE
BROOK
STERNDALE
DEWHURST
NETHERWOOD
BISCAYYELDHAM
LUX
EM
BU
RG
GARDENS
WA
LKCHANCELLORS
TERRIVER
CRISP ST
BLACK'S
AN
GE
L
RO
AD
RO
AD
ROAD
ROAD
BU
TE
MELROSE
BATOUM
LENA
TRUSSLEY
OV
ER
ST
ON
E
RD
RD
ST
RE
ET
ME
WS
GR
OV
E
MS
AS
TR
OP
TCEASTROP
RD
SU
LGR
AV
E
RD
TCE
MS
ROAD
BA
RB
HSUB S'DREHPEHS
CROMWELL
GARDENS
RD
GDNS
LOR
IS
ME
LRO
SE
GR
GDNS
GREEN
GREAT CHURCH
ROAD
RO
WA
NTE
RR
AC
E
GA
RD
EN
SN
OTR
EVL
OW
RO
WA
N
SH
OR
T L
AN
DS
MARGRAVINE
SN
ED
RA
G T
EL
OCCLOSE
WATERHOUSE
MORE CLOSE
WINDSOR
CAITHNESS
DAN
IRVING
BLYTHE
BOLINGBROKE
US
TIN
E
GA
RD
EN
S
HAARLEMRD
BROOK
DU
NS
AN
Y
AU
G
GREEN
GREEN
RO
AD
APPLEGARTH
GART
H
ROAD
RO
AD
RD
LAKESIDE
RO
AD
ROAD
RE
FAR
OE
CE
YLO
N
MA
SB
RO
'
RO
AD
GIR
DLERS
AYN
HO
EROAD
SOU
L-ROADDERN
ROAD
MILSON
FIELDING
VA
LE T
ER
SP
RIN
G-
STREET
ROAD
RD
MILSON
RO
AD
RO
AD
RDROAD
PRIMULA
LIL
CU
STREET
RD
COURT
ASKHAM
PL
CU
RW
EN
VESPAN
THE
ARMSTRONG
ROAD
RD
CO
WLE
Y R
DA
V
SE
CO
ND
AS
KH
AM
ASKEW
ST ELMO
RD
FIE
LDO
LD
-
BECKLOW
ST
RO
NS
A
GAYFORD
R O A D
ELIZ
AB
ET
HD
AV
IS
GDS
AV
ST
ELM
OR
D
RD
ROAD
PARK
RY
LET
T
ROAD
RD
ROAD
ROAD
ROAD
MS
LAU EN
CE
R
LANDOR
HADYN
WK
OLLGAR CLOSE
CLIFTON
CR
ASKEW
AV CR
ES
RO
AD
WALLFLO
YEW
L O
C K
STEVENTON
ROAD
AV
EN
UE
FIR
ST
ROAD
ST
HILARY
WAY
FOXGLOVE
SQTAMARIS
K
H E M
RD
RO
AD
AYCLIFFE
URNE
S A W L E Y
ALDBO
RO
AD
ST
SE
DG
EF
OR
D
ROAD
CLEMATIS
TREE
R O
A D
DAFFODIL
WER
VIOLASQ
SUN
DEWSTREET
MELLITUS
NORBROKE
WA
LK
ST
STREET
S T R
E E
T
STREET
CA
CT
US
STREET
HIL
AR
Y
WK
ON
IA
STREET
HEN
CH
MAN
STOSMUND
S T
R E
E T
BE
G-
QU
AR
TE
RS
WE
ST
STREET
BENNELONG
ROAD
STANLAKE VILLAS
AVEN
UE
RD
AUSTRALIA
ROAD
GR
OV
E
GR
OV
E
GR
OV
E
RO
AD
RO
AD
BATSON
FINDON
ROAD
ST
AR
FIE
LD
DA
VIS
VIL
LE
PARK
ROXWELL
RO
AD
RO
AD
RO
AD
PE
RC
YP
ER
CY
RO
AD
ROAD
LYCETT
KEITH
RO
AD
GR
OV
E
CL
WE
ST
-
ROAD
RO
AD
GOODWIN
ST
RO
AD
RD
LEFFERN
RD
ELL
ING
HA
M
ROAD
CA
TH
NO
R
ME
LINA
RD
RO
AD
BO
S
HAM
CONING-
ROAD
VA
LEW
ILLOW
DUNRAVEN
GR
AV
ES
EN
D
WO
RM
HO
LT
ROAD
ROAD
TH
OR
PE
BA
NK
GA
LLOW
AY
RD
ST
PA
N
ST
BRYONY
ORCH ID
AC
RVE
ST
THE
CU
GD
S
SY
RVE
MILF
OIL
R O A D
AD
ELA
IDE
OA
KL
AN
DS
OR
MIS
TO
N
HALSBURY
ROAD
ST
ER
ICA
ROAD
BLO
EM
FO
NT
EIN D
AO
R
THORNFIELD
SCOTT'S
RO
RO
AD
RO
AD
ROAD
HE
TLE
Y
S'N
EH
PE
TS
TS
GO
DO
LPH
INR
DLL
OS
RE
GNI
RD
AR
MIN
GE
R
RO
AD
RO
AD
ROAD
G'HK
AV
EN
UE
RO
AD
TITMUSS
ROAD
DE
VO
NP
OR
T
WA
RB
EC
K
DA
OR
CO
VE
RD
ALE
DA
OR
RO
AD
ROAD
C O M M O N W E A L T H A V E
ROAD
ELLERSLIE
AVE
SOUTH
RD
ETHELDEN
WA
Y
COMMON-
AUSTRALIA
IND
IA
CA
NA
DA
AFRICA
EL
AD
BA
SU
TF
OL
CLOSE
BATMAN
STAN
SWINDON ST
SIN
UT
ROAD
WA
Y
RO
AD
AU
ST
RA
LIA
DORANDO
CLOSE
BENTWORTH
AR
TIL
LE
RY
LA
NE
STREET HEATHSTAN
MA
UR
ICE
ST
ST
TE
RR
ICK
MEWS
RD
SHALFLEET DR
Y E
L M
A R
B
WESTWICK
MINFORD
ST
TADMOR
SILV
ER
RO
AD
EN
AL
RA
FC
AM
WO
OD
-
MA
RK
ET
GR
OV
E
SH
EP
HE
RD
'S
RIC
HF
OR
D
BU
SH
WE
LLS
GER
RO
AD
EMI
L
SN
ED
RA
G
PE
NN
AR
D
ST
HOPG
OO
D
RD
ROAD
BA
MB
-
POPLAR
GDS
GROVE
BULWERST
ST
INE
ALD
NO
TX
AC
RD
FR
ITH
VILLE
OSEC
L
WHITE CITY
EXHIBITION
CLOSE
RE
LA
Y R
OA
D
ARIEL
WAY
RD
CHARECROFT WAY
RO
CK
LEY
GDNS
GARDENS
ROAD
STSTERNE
GDNS
SINCLAIR
WO
OD
STOC
K
YA
W
GR
OH
AN
SA
RD
ME
WS
NO
RLA
ND
CLE
AR
WA
TER
YA
L
TCE
RO
CR
RO
YA
L
MS
VILLA
S
AN
N'S
R O
A D
OLA
F
ST
F R
E S
T O
N
BA
RD
STEVESHAM
RD
COMBE
SW
AN
S-
MORTIMER
RDSQ
WILSHAM
ST
PLSTONELEIGH
STO
NE
LEIG
H
TREADGOLD
AN
SLE
IGH
AN
N'S
PL
ST
ST
WHITCHURCH RD
SIR
DA
R
ALED
AV
ON
BOMORE
LLE
FN
ER
G
ST
L A
T I M
E R
SHINFIELD
CAV
EYNH
AM
NASCOT
GLEN
STWALL
STST
ROY
ERS-
ST
RO
AD
ST
OXFORD
KINGSBRIDGE
RO
AD
LATIMER
R O
A D
PL
KELFIELD
RD
R O
A D
BASSETT RD
GARDENS
DARFIELD
WAYNFLETE
WAY
SQ
FINS
TOC
K
GARDENS
AV
EN
UE
RD
HE
LEN
'S
GD
NS
CAMBRIDGE GDNS
STREET
BLECHYNDEN
KINGS
SILCHESTER
YE
LE
MA
RB
DA
OR
RD
CLOSE
CR
ROAD
CL
CLBELLAM
Y
STANIER
THAXTON
RO
GD
NS
PE
MB
RO
KE
PEMBROKE
DENS
ROAD
CH
A
GLE
DS
TAN
ES CHARLEVILLE
CLUB
FAIRHOLME
RO
AD
SP
EN
CE
RM
S
TER
FIELD
TAS
SO
RD
KIN
NO
UL
GARDENS
QU
EE
N'S
CLU
B
ST
MU
SA
RD
ANDREW'S
QUEEN'S
GDS
RDPERHAM
RO
AD
CHESSON
RO
AD
RD
CHESSON
BRAMBER
RDARCHEL
NO
RM
AN
D
TURNE-
VILLE
RD
ROAD
TU
RN
EV
ILLER
D
RD
ARCHEL
SQ
EC
AL
P
ROAD
ROAD
ROAD
STFANE
MARCHBANK
FRANKLIN
EU
NE
VA
NAPIER
CASTLETOWN
ROAD
ADDISON BR
MORE
ROAD
ROAD
GORLESTON
SOU
TH-
COMERAGHBARTON ROAD
VERNON
AVEFITZ-
EDITH
RO
AD
DENSGAR
PA
LLISE
R R
OA
D
BARON'S
AUR
IOL
NO
DDI
LG
ED
ITH
RO
AD
CLOSE
ROAD
GUNTERSTONE
MU
ND
EN
ST
COM
BE ST
DR
GL
AZ
BU
RY
COURT
GWENDWRRD
VE
RE
KE
R
MS
ST
AVEFITZJAMES
ROADTR
EV
AN
ION
GDS
RUSSELL
ROAD
GR
AT
TO
N
HA
ZLI
TT
ROAD
BLYTHE
WAY
RO
AD
WALK
LYO
NS
MACLISE
BEAC
ONSF
IELD
ROAD
TERR
ACE
RUSSELL GARDENS MEWS
RD
RD
PO
RT
EN
RD
RD
SIN
CLA
IR
ROAD
RDRD
RUSSELL
BISHOP KING'SROAD
EA
RS
BY PLA
CE
ADDISON
SON
GDSLANDHO
L-R
O A
D
ADD
I
CRES
ROAD
ROAD
CH
ALLO
NE
RS
T
ROAD
CR
CR
LLO
NE
R
BE
AU
MO
NT
MONT
BEAU
LIS
EDITH VILLAS
NOR
CR
ESE
ND
RDSTO
NOR
STANWICK
AV
RD
MORNINGTON
ROAD
MAT
HES
ON
AVONMORE
MUND ST
TT
AVI
AV
AIS
GILL
CLOSE
BECKFORD
WARW
ICK
HOLLAND PK RD
NA
PIE
R P
L
ROADRO
AD
RADNOR
TER
RD
OAKWOOD COURT
ADD
ISONRD
MELBURY
EDW
ARD
ESPLA
BB
OT'S
ST M
AR
Y
PEMBROKE
GDS
GAR
SQ
REDCLIFFE SQ
CO
LEHER
NE
F I N
B O
R
CR
ES
ON
GAR
PL
ROAD
RICKETT
HILDYARD
SE
AG
RA
VE
YDLILLIE
RDMERRINGTON
RD
RESS
EM
P-
ST
PLROXBY
IFIELD
REDCLIFFE SQ
TERW
ESTGATE
U G
H
MS
O
RO
AD
REDCLIFFE S
T
EARL'S
PENYWERN R
OAD
LOGAN PLACE
CR
OM
WELL
GARD
SQ
NEVERN
LONGRIDGE
ROAD
CLUNY
PH
ILC
RES
NEVERN
NEVERN ROAD
TREBO
VIR R
OAD
GD
NS
EA
RD
LEY
KE
M
NEVER
N SQ
NEVERN
SQ
SQ
CLO
SE
RD
PE
MB
RO
KE
CO
LEHER
NE
EARL'S COURT SQ
COURT
MS
KR
AM
ER ST
WHARFEDALE
QU
EE
NS
DA
LE
R O A D
AD
DIS
ON
V I L
L A
SS
Q
H O
L L
A N
D
ENT
GDNS
PL
ADDISON
SC
GD
NS
HO
LLAN
D P
K
DA
LE
AV
EN
UE
QU
EE
NS
-WK
NO
RLA
ND
PO
TTER
Y
RO
AD
RO
AD
STREET
GARDENSDARNLEY
RO
AD
PENZANCE
PRINCES
PENZANCE ST
PR
INC
ED
ALE
RUNCORNPA
RKP
AR
KP
LG
OR
HA
M
PL
PL
PLHESKETHR
OA
DT
HR
ES
HE
RS
PL
AV
ON
DA
LE
RD
WA
LME
R
CLA
RE
ND
ON
PO
RT
RO
AD
PL
RO
AD
LANE
PLA
CE
STDULFORD
HammersmithPier
NEW ZEALAND
WAY
ROAD
ROAD
ROAD
ROAD
DISTILLERY
LANE
MAN
B
CUMBERLAND
AVE
QU
EE
NS
CR
ES
EN
T
KIN
GS
DA
LE
GA
RD
EN
S
OLYM
PIA
WAY
STO
WE
BRITI
SH
MUL-
BERRY
PL
MILLER'SCT
GROV
E
STH
AITEN
PL
NO
BM
AH
C
PL
NORTH
SUSSEXPL
ALBION
MS
MS
FORGE
MEWS
BECKLOW
MEW
S
ED
AN
SCT
GR
AN
SD
EN
RD
CO
LLING
BO
UR
NE
RO
AD
NIE
TN
OF
ME
OLB
YA
W
PEONY
GDS
STOKESLE
Y ST
PIONEERCLOSE
EK
AL
NA
TS
POPL
AR MS
MILLER'S
WAY
OS
MA
N
RD
BLYTHEMS
BE
RG
-M
S
MS
OXFORD
GATE
MER
CERS
PLAC
E
CHARLOTTE
MEW
S
CHALK HILL
ROAD
COM
ME
WS
NORMAND
MS
Frank
Banfield
Park
ORCHARD
SQ
LANGTRY PL
PRINCE'S
MEWS
GS
VER-
NTHBENA
CHISWICK
BR
AD
ING
TCE
CT
AUGUSTUS
CLOSE
GA
INS
BO
RO
UG
HC
OU
RT
CL
APP
STATION
RUCKLIDGE
AVENUE
SALTER STREET
STA
TION
CLIFTON
H Y T H ER D
Trading EstateGateway
CREWEPL
ENTER
ST
FORTUNE
WA
Y
BUCKINGHAM
RD
HONEYWOOD
RD
RO
AD
BRAC
EWELL R
D
WOODMANS
Industrial Park
Mitre Bridge
MITR
E
HILL FARM RD
OAKWORTH ROAD
S T Q U I N T I N A V E N U E
CA
LD-
AV
E
PLERO
N
BARLBY
DALGARNO
D A L G A R N O
BREW
STER G
DS
NO
TT
US
HIG
HLE
VE
R
QU
INTIN
RD
GDNS
WA
Y
WA
Y
SU
TT
ON
WA
YP
AN
GB
OU
RN
E
G A R D E N S
ROAD
PURVES
HAZEL RD
R O A DH Y T H E
LETCHFORD
VALLIERE
RIGELEY
WALDO
GD
NS
LET
CH
FO
RD
KE
NM
ON
T
RD
MS
RD
GD
NS
P A L E R M O
LEGHO
RN
RD
FURNESS
ROAD RD
ODESSAWROTTE
R O A D
GD
NS
TRE
NM
AR
VICTOR
GD
NS
HO
LBE
RT
ON
ROAD
PONSARD RD
NAPIER RD
RO
AD R
OA
DR
AV
EN
SW
OR
TH
FE
LIX
TO
WE
RO
AD
PLACE
ALMA
GR
EY
HO
UN
D R
OA
D
BATHURST GDNS
RO
AD
ASHBURNHAMROAD
BURROWSROAD
EG
ELL
OC
RAINHAM RD
WAKEMAN RD
MORTIMER ROAD
Hythe RoadIndustrial
Estate
GW
ALI
OR
RD
LIF
FO
RD
RD
LACYRD
CARDINALRD
BANGA
BLA
CK
ET
T
ST
AN
BR
IDG
E
FA
RLO
W
RD
WY
MO
ND
WOL
TN
EP
NO
TF
ES
RD
ST
ST
ST
ST
ST
DA
FU
RS
T
DR
YA
DS
T
CLOSE
STOCKHURST
ELA
DN
OM
MO
C
WAY
HORNE WAY
SO
ME
RV
ILLE
AVBRASENOSE
DVE
OR
IEL
DVE
CH
UR
CH
ROAD
CART
WRI
GHT
WAY
WYATT
DR
IVE
EV
DW
YA
TT
TRINITY
HEIDEGGERCRES
EDMUNDS
SQ
SAINTCA
STE
LNA
U
GLE
NT
HA
MG
DN
S
LON
SDAL
E
ROAD
HOWSMANROAD
NOWELL ROAD
KILMING
TON RO
ADVE
RD
UN
RO
AD
FERRYLANE
CHISW
ICK
MALL
NETHERAVEN
RD
CORNWALL GVEBALFERNGVEASH
GROVE
WILTONAVE
BROOK
RD BEVERLEY
ROAD
HO
ME
FIE
LDR
OA
D
KCI
WSI
HC
LAN
E
EN
NIS
MO
RE
AV
UP
HA
MP
AR
K
TH
OR
NT
ON
AV
RA
VE
NS
ME
DE
WA
Y
STH
RO
AD
LANESOUTH
WO
OD
STO
CK
RD
QU
EE
N
RUPERT RD
AN
NE
'SG
DN
S
TH
EA
VE
NU
E
GREENEND
RD
RUGBYRD
SALTCOATS
RDHAMILT
ONRD
HA
WK
S-
RD
ST
.
RD
RD
AL
EX
AN
DR
A
GE
OR
GE
S
HATFIELD
ROAD
HE
AD
RD
CANHAM RD
ST
AN
LEY
GA
RD
EN
S
BRADFORD
RD
OAKWAY
SY
CA
MO
RE
CLS
EAST
ACTON
LANE
CA
RLI
SLE
AV
EN
UE
THE
TEE
SHAF
GD
NS
SCHOOL RD
BETHUNE RD
BASHLEY
RD
ST.
LEONARD'SRD
HARLEY RD
CAPLE
RDRANELAGH
RD
AVENUERD
BUCKINGHAMM
WS
SPEZIA RD
SUNBEAMCR
SHREWSBURY ST
SHREWSBURYST
ST.
TEMPLETO
N PLAC
E
RED
CLIFFE
GARDENS
CATHCART RD
FAWCETT S
T
REDCLIFFE
PL
SLA
IDB
UR
N S
T
BLA
ST
ST
NA
VIL
US
CT
PL
CASS
PLA
CE
CLPL
TH
AM
ES
PL
RUVIGNYCL
LOWERRICHMOND
RD
MUNSTER CT
LANCAS
COURT
ACCESS
ROAD
BURFORD WK
OAK
LEY WK
PAYNES
WK
FRE
EM
AN
SMITH
SR
ET
UH
S
SQVINE
SQ
SU
N
RD
INGTON
HALL
GDS
KENS-
DIEPPE
CLO
SE
MAY ST
AISGILL
AV
SQ
FARNELL
MS
STH EDWARDES
SQ
ST MARY ABBOTS TCE
STRANGW
AYS
TCE
RD
ILCHESTER
AB
BO
TSB
UR
YRD
AB
BO
TSB
UR
YC
L
OAKWOOD
LN
SOM
ERSE
T
SQ
RO
AD
ST
AVONMORE
VERNON
HAZLITT
BROO
K
BLA
CK
LAN
E
GA
RD
EN
S
ROAD
RD
FIELDINGRD
CRESSY
RO
AD
RO
AD
SU
LGR
AV
EGD
S
D'PORT
MS
LAR
CH
AV
DU
CR
OS
RD
EMLYN
GNS
ST
MARKETAPP
VERITYCL
CHARLOTTE
MS
RD
NO
RLA
ND
SQ
NORLAND
PL
CLO
SE
PO
RTLA
ND
RD
POR
TLAND
RD
HU
DS
ON
KC
OLE
VA
H
CL C
L
COMMONWEALTH
AVE
TEMPLEMEAD CL
CROW RD
MYLNECL
BLA
CK
PASS
RD
AD
AM
WK
WESTVIEW
CL
ST
NURSERY
LANE
BLAKESCL
ME
TH
WO
LD R
D
ST
AB
LE W
AY
WAY
WE
BB
CL
WENDOVER
RD
ROAD
CU
MB
ER
LAN
D P
K
STM
ARK'S
RD
PARSONS
RD
RD
TES
THORNE
DOWN
FIELD
IDY ROAD
TER
WEALTH
GO
ATE
LAKE
GIR
ON
D
SALIS-
CH
GR
E
TH
BE
TONE
ACHENS
GAR
TERRACE
MEWS
BR
IDG
E
TTERSEA
RY
KIE
GHTON
ENSCRAV
LD R
D
WEST
STO
N
ST
CRAN-
CTI
BOU
VE
RNE
ND
ELRING
MU
R
RE
RD
DO
STREET
CO
MB
E
PS
F
LANE
OR
D
RD
AD
TEAD
NTY
HESTER
RE
PUR
SERS
MANS
ART
VAN
CRES
CE
FUL-
CHIS
RO
AD
BUCHANAN
GDNS
PRISE
WAY
CLOSEDGE
BARTLE
ROAD
CO
WLIN
G
CLO
SE
LAN
D
BELL'S AL
SOTHERON
PL
GREEN
MO
NSO
N
LUS
HIN
G-
TON
RD
ALL
SO
ULS
'
ROAD
BRI
RD
DEPOT ROAD
CL
MA
CK
EN
ZIE
WHITE CITY
CL
LAU
RE
NC
E
RING
ST JAMES'S
ROAD
TER
ROAD
HIPPO
DR
OM
E
WESTVILLE
SW
EM
HIPPO-
PLACE
RICH-
CLARE-
ST
CROSS
FORD
ORO
UGH
MEW
S
KIN
GH
AM
DROME
HO
LLAN
D P
K
NDON
ST
HOLLAND
LANS-
GARDENS
ELG
INC
R
BLE
NH
EIM
CO
RN
WA
LL
OAKWOOD
SO
UTH
FIELD
COURT
ADDISON RD
RD
PETER'S
WO
RC
E-
DR
PETER'S
STER
ST ST
BLENHEIM RD
VILLAS
AVE
AP
PLE
-RO
AD
ROAD
SAM
UEL'
SCL
OSE
CRS
AVON-
ROAD
PE
MB
RO
KE
VILLA
S
FENELON
PL
MEWS
NEVERNPLACE
SQUARE
EARL'S
CO
UR
TR
OAD
DORCHESTER GVE
MAWSON
LANE
BO
ILE
AU
RO
AD
EVERDON
ROAD
PLACEKEBLE
Riverside
Studios
SQ
COOMER
ROAD
RD
SU
NR
D
SUN
MAY
ST
JOHN'S
WALHAM
YARD
ST MARKSGROVE
LANGTON ST
REDCLIFFE MEWS
AD
EFFIE
CLOSE
MARINEFIELD
MALTINGS PL
PARKHAM
STREET
GR
AN
FIELD
STR
EE
T
TROTT
ST
WHISTLERS AV
THOR NEY
CRES
FLOSSST
EP
RO
HT
NA
FS
T
WA
LKE
RP
L
HOTHAM ROAD
BO
RN
EO
ST
WES
THO
RPE
RD
LORE
STR
EE
T
DE
OD
OR
RO
AD
TERRACE
PIER
NE
WC
OM
EN
RD
PLO
UG
H R
OA
D
NORTH PASSAGE
SU
DLO
W
RO
AD
FIELD
BRAMBLE
GARDENS
JEDDO
MEWS
CR
CR
DOWNE
RISE
PK
PLACE
JOHN'S
GDNS
RD
BA
LLIOL R
D
BURY
AVE
SLEY
GEORGE
WICK
PO
RT
GLADETHE
INV
ER
ME
AD
CLO
SE
-H
CR
AT
C E
LA
D
CROWTHER
CLOSE
ELGIN CL
EMPRESS
APPROACH
GURNEYRD
HARWOOD
MEWS
IMPERIAL
CRESCENT
LE
RR
Y C
L
TE
KR
AM
LAN
E
MUNSTER
MEW
S
NORFOLK
TERR
ROSEWOOD
SQUARE
WA
LHA
M G
RE
EN
CO
UR
T
S'N
OSL
IW
DA
OR
SALT
ER
GA
LEN
A
GR
EE
NRODA
ANRD
DALE
SUNDEWCLOSE
JOSLINGSCLOSE
AS
KE
W C
RE
SSO
UTH
WAY
CLO
SE
TN
UH
CLOSE
QUEENSDALE
CRES
CASTLE CLOSE
BARBARA
RDJERVIS
PALEMEAD
CLOSE
THE
LEN
SB
UR
Y A
VE
NU
E
BOULEVARD
MILLSYARD
CROWN YD
CL
DAIRY CL
PLOUGH CLOSE
AMBER
WAY
S'DREHPEHS
ECALP HSUB
BOURBON
LANE
DERE CL
ERIN
CL
R O A D
LAN
E
CHISWICK
V A L E
EM
LYN
RO
AD
LAR
DE
N
AVE
T H E
WEST
VICT
ROAD
OLD
OAK
L A N
EO
L D
C O
M M
O N
O A
K
R O
A D
BAG
LANE
BRID
GE
R O
A D
SW
STER
MUN
RO
AD
GR
EE
NL
AN
E
PA
RS
ON
S
HO
ME
STE
AD
KELVEDO
N
RD
BAGLEY'S
LANE
PUTN
EY
RICHMOND
ROAD
ROAD
PUTNEY
HIGH
BRIDGE
WAY
P A L
R O A D
F U L H
A M
L I L L I E
BR
IDG
EW
AN
DS
WO
RTH
F U
R O
RO
AD
K I N
G 'S
STREET
PUTN
EY
BRID
GE
PUTN
EY
APPR
OACH
N E W
R O A D
FULHAM
FULHAMHIG
H
R O A D
ROAD
N E W
K I N G ' S
RO
AD
TOWNMEAD
BR
IDG
E
WA
ND
SW
OR
TH
DAWES
R O A
D
DAWES
L I L L I E
MU
NS
F U L H A M
ROAD
R O A D
ROAD
K I N G
' S
IMPERIAL
RO
AD
TO
WN
ME
AD
ROAD
RO
AD
R O
LOTS
RO
AD
CHEYNE
BR
IDG
EN
DR
OA
D
TRIN
ITY R
OA
D
STRE
ET
TALGARTH
ROAD
SH
EP
HE
K I N G
K I N G
ROAD
U X B R I D G ER O
WELL
D O
O W
ROAD
RO
AD
STU
DLA
ND
ST
GREYHOUND
BLYTHE
GDNS
ADDISON
ROAD
BECKLOW
ROAD
CO
NIN
GH
AM
RO
AD
HOUNDGREY
ROAD
ROAD
STAR
RO
AD
RD
LOWER ADDISON
ADD
AD
DIS
ON
PADD
H O L L A N D
H O L L A N D
W E S T W A Y
HIGH ROAD
RO
AD
H A M
M E R
S M I T H
HAM
MER
SMIT
H
BRID
GE
HAM
MER
SMIT
H
S T R
G R E A T W E S T
GOLD
WICK
ROAD
ENS
R O A D
GLENTHORNE
D A
L L
I N
G
ROAD
D A O
R
P A L A
BRIDGE
QUEEN
CARO
LINE
BEADONROAD
ROAD
TEERTS
F
HAMMERSMITH
BUTTERWICK
G R O
V E
HS
UB
RO
AD
H A M M E R S M I T H
A S K E W
O L D
R O
A D
O A
K
R O
WO
OD
B L O
E M
F O
N T
E I N
U X B R
R O A D
D A
O R
C A N ED U
R O A D
SHEPHERD'S
BUSH
E N
A L
GREEN
A 3 2 2 0
LAN
E
L I L L I E
R O A D
ROAD
NORTH
END
RO
AD
R O A D
R O A D
W A R W
I C K
NO
RTH
WEST
RO
AD
EN
D
CROM
KENSINGTON
HIGHSTREET
OLDBROMPTON
R O A D
WESTCROMWELL ROAD
W A R W I C K
R O A D
ROAD
A V E N U E
S T R E E T
P A R K
NIGHT
RD
HARLESDEN
TUBBS ROAD
HIGH
STREET
SCR
UBS
LANE
HARROW
SC
RU
BS
LAN
E
ROAD
ROADHAR
S'D
REHPE
HSBU
SHDA
OR
O L D
O A
KC
O M
M O
NL A
N E
HAMMERFLYOVER
NO
RTH
RO
AD
EN
D
ERN
I D G EA D
ROW
ORIA
A M
ISON
TE
R
A C E
A D
LEY'S
E E T
DON
AN
HAWK
RD
'S
W A YW E S T
SMITH
A D
NUE
WALK
A D
L H
ROAD
INGALE
GARDENS
GDNS
ADDISON
A S K E W
BROADWAY
PA
RS
ON
S
LOWER
GO
LDH
AWK
GR
EE
N
U LH A
M
C E
of BrentLondon Borough
Estate
EstateClem Attlee
GardensFlora
House
Ow
enR
obert
GreenEstate
Burne JonesHouse
LinacreCourt
Guinness
PeabodyEstate
Est
ate
Quee
n C
aroline
Em
lyn
Gardens
Woodford
Court
CourtBush
Gibbs
MARCUSGARVEYPARK
SwanWharf WillowbankWharf
eg
dirbt
oo
F
CarraraBank Wharf
HospitalLouise
Princess
HospitalHammersmith
Charing
Hospital
Cross
TheRavenscourt Park
Hospital
Chelsea
Ground
Football
Stadium
Linford
Q P RFootballGround
Fulham
Football
Ground
Christie
CentreBroadway
Earls CourtExhibitionBuilding
Empress
Building
Olympia
PALACEFULHAM
BBCTelevisionCentre
Scrubs
Old Oak
Sidings
Sidings
North Pole International Depot
Old Oak Common
H.M. Prison
Wormwood
Apollo
Kings Mall
SulivanEnterprise Centre
FulhamPools
State
ThamesWaterTower
LyricSquare
WestfieldLondon
CHISWICK HIGH ROAD
G R E AT W E S T R O A D
WELLESLEY ROAD
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 2 9
oPTIoN CoMPARISoNTwo tunnel options have been appraised in this feasibility report, a short option and a long option. This was based on the extensive public engagement carried out, assumed economic and environmental factors and engineering judgement. Six options were tested through the geo-technical study, one short, two long and all three options with ‘junctions’. The two options selected to be
compared and reported are a short option (1a in the Halcrow report) and a long option (3a in the Halcrow report). The image below shows the indicative portal locations and alignment of options 1a, 2a and 3a in the Halcrow report. For the purposes of this appraisal, the short option is 1, (the green line) and the long option is 3, (the blue line). The red line is a variation of the long option.
step 1 step 3
step 2 step 4
3 0 HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study
short optionThe short option is essentially a replacement of Hammersmith Flyover and follows the same alignment as the A4 and the flyover. The western portal starts at Hammersmith Town Hall and the eastern portal at ealing, Hammersmith and West London College. The tunnel is approximately one mile in length and would be constructed
using a cut-and-cover method to a depth of approximately 15m in order to pass safely under the London Underground cutting. The figure (below left) shows the construction steps of the top down cut and cover method. other similar cut and cover constructions have been completed in London and the flyover can be underpinned while excavation work is carried out below.
The figure on the page opposite shows the detailed alignment and longitudinal profile of the short option. It shows the 230m open cut sections at the portal sites, the gradient of the ramps and known subterranean obstructions, such as the London Underground cutting and existing/planned Thames Water utilities.
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 3 1
long optionThe long option is a two-and-a-half-mile twin tunnel between Chiswick and earl’s Court. The western portal is at the junction with Sutton Court Road in the London Borough of Hounslow, which is considerably further west than first anticipated due to the need for the tunnel to pass safely under the Thames. The eastern portal is between Warwick Road and earl’s Court Road in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. Below is an indicative longitudinal section of a portal showing the open cut approach ramp which is a common feature to both types of construction.The main tunnel would be constructed using a tunnel boring machine (TBM) with an outer diameter of 12.8m - which is about 50 per cent bigger than the Crossrail tunnel. The portals would be constructed using the cut-and-cover method described earlier. The tunnel would be twin bore in that it would have a separate tunnel for each direction of traffic, which doubles the length of tunnel required to be excavated to approximately five miles.
The figure below shows the different alignment of the two bores and the longitudinal profile as the bores pass below the Thames and two London Underground cuttings and above the proposed Thames Tideway Tunnel. The open ramp and
approach ramp (Cutting)
Cut and cover section
Bored tunnel and cut and cover connection
3 2 HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study
cut-and-cover ramp are similar in nature to those of the short tunnel.
Both tunnels have been designed to carry two lanes of traffic in each direction (based on forecast traffic flow and nature of the flyover). Ventilation and fire safety systems have been built into both options.
We recognise that these are only two options and a tunnel could take any number of alignments, depths, lengths and portal locations. These two options were designed to start the debate about the benefits and drawbacks of the principle of tunnelling and to be used as a baseline for assessing and appraising any future options.
Open cut, cut and cover, SCL and bored tunnel section.
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 3 3
option construction method
total tunnel lenGth
construction cost* (2013 prices)
short Cut-and-cover 1.6km/ 1 mile £218m
Long Tunnel boring machine
8.2km/5.1 miles £1,297m
construction drawbacks
CostThe cost of the construction alone (not including land acquisition, governance or mitigation) is a function of the length of the tunnel and construction methods. The different construction methodologies between the long and short options affect their construction cost. The longer tunnel options are twin bore which increases total tunnel length cost. A single bore was considered, with traffic stacked inside, however the tunnel boring machine required to build such a tunnel would be the largest in the world at 20m in diameter.
Notwithstanding other influences, the longer the tunnel, the more expensive the construction cost.
To put these figures into context, the recently completed skyscraper, The Shard in London Bridge, cost £450m to construct.
These costs also do not include the removal of the flyover or any highway realignment required along the A4 or local road network. These costs will be comparable across both options and are at this stage unknown.
Traffic disruptionThe two options considered as part of this study take broadly the same time to construct at three years. Again this is down to their length and different construction methodologies. Traffic flow along the A4 is assumed to be disrupted for approximately half the construction time. Disruption to the A4 is likely to entail lane closures, tidal flow and night-time and weekend closures.
The following table compares construction and disruption time. It also established another fundamental difference in the long and short tunnels, namely the location of the disruption. There are four areas of surface disruption: the western portal, the eastern portal, the main tunnel excavation and the flyover removal.
For the short option, the four sites will all be in Hammersmith, limiting the construction disruption to Hammersmith Town Centre. However, for the longer tunnel, the construction will be spread along the A4 corridor.
Both options have a broadly similar disruptive impact on the operation of the A4 however this disruption is located in different places.
*These cost estimates are based on a high level feasibility study and include a 30 per cent contingency uplift. TfL standards suggest a 45 per cent uplift and this range has been used in the financial appraisal in later chapters.
option construction time
a4 disruption location oF main disruption
short 3 years 18 months Hammersmith town centre
long 3 years 18 months Portal locations, drive site and Hammersmith town centre
3 4 HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study
Construction lorriesThe amount of construction traffic created by any subterranean construction is a function of the material removed and the construction methodology.
The longer the tunnel, the more spoil removed and more construction material required, which therefore creates more construction traffic. This, however, does not take into account the opportunity for river transport of certain materials that a tunnel project adjacent to the river could explore. This could reduce lorry movements significantly.
Translating the volume of material created and required for a tunnelling project into likely lorry movements is not straightforward. In addition, the location of this traffic will be concentrated at different times and locations over the multi-year construction period. For the short option this is Hammersmith town centre as it is the location for the four main construction areas: the two portals, the main tunnel and the removal of the flyover.
The potential use of the river could reduce the number of surface lorry movements and would have different levels of reduction for the different construction locations, as above. At Hammersmith,
for example, the use of conveyor belts and catenary systems could potentially move spoil the short distance to the river without any significant use of road vehicles - although such a method would create its own environmental impact issues. It is also possible that the great majority of the necessary lorry movements, for all options, would be via the A4 itself, thereby minimising the wider environment of the impact.
The table below shows the total volume of spoil for each option that would need be removed and an approximation of the daily lorry equivalent movements this spoil, and incoming material, creates without using the river. Use of the river could greatly reduce these figures. Ninety per cent of the main tunnel’s excavated material, tunnel lining precast segments and concrete aggregates could be transported by barge.
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 3 5
option total tunnel lenGth
Volume oF spoil to be disposed (m3)
aVeraGe daily lorry equiValents with no riVer use
aVeraGe daily lorry equiValents assuminG use oF riVer
short 1.6km/1 mile 430,000 150 28
long 8.2km/5.1 miles 1,140,000 375 61
construction beneFits
A wider appraisal of other benefits of construction has yet to be undertaken for either option. However, there are a number of environmental and economic benefits within this major construction project.
The number (and range) of jobs that would be created by this project would be significant. It is likely that many of these jobs would be made available to local residents, and opportunities for local businesses (such as Halcrow and WLLD) would also be significant.
There is a well-documented concept known as traffic evaporation that suggests that when highway capacity is reduced, traffic flow reduces accordingly - or it appears to evaporate. Most examples of this are based on permanent reductions in capacity. If the A4 was required to have its capacity reduced during construction for a substantially long time, the same concept is likely to apply. This reduction in traffic flow would likely result in reductions in traffic noise and improvements in air quality. However it would need to be considered alongside the air quality and noise implications of the construction activity itself.
option percentaGe oF east-west traFFic likely to use tunnel
short 100%
long 50%
3 6 HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study
traffic redistributionThe traffic analysis that was carried out as part of this feasibility study is detailed below, along with its limitations and assumptions. Traffic redistribution varies based on the length of a tunnel and its start and end points. In this instance, the longer the tunnel, the less traffic would be generated. As such, opportunities to remove or reduce the existing surface road network diminish as tunnel length increases, primarily down to the current traffic distribution and proportion of through traffic.
Smaller side road junction tunnels can provide opportunities for the main tunnel to pick up and distribute more traffic. However this is one area in which much further and more detailed strategic analysis is required. Further traffic modelling could also forecast the wider sub-regional impact, such as local and strategic redistribution based on a new network.
Essentially the longer the tunnel, the less opportunity traffic has to turn on and off, and hence it will carry less traffic.
operational drawbacks
The traffic analysis was carried out using TfL data including traffic counts and outputs from their strategic traffic model for West London. Both current, actual and modelled traffic flows were reviewed from this data alongside forecasts for 2031 traffic flows based on the growth in jobs and population in the current London Plan and the planned transport network (without factoring in a tunnel).
The traffic analysis was carried out to understand how much traffic would be likely to use the various tunnel options - which in turn, has influenced tunnel dimensions - and what surface network would be required. The traffic analysis was developed during the project to include investigating the Hammersmith Gyratory, the impacts on the various options and to explore opportunities to reduce the severance caused by the current one-way system. This could include returning the gyratory to two-way working, which has been achieved at other similar gyratory systems in London.
All quoted modelled data uses the rounded average evening peak traffic flow only. Flows in the inter-peak, weekend and morning peak periods are likely to be different.
In 2031, it is forecast that approximately 2,500 vehicles an hour will use the flyover in either
direction, an increase in 14 per cent on the current flow. Traffic flow to the east of the flyover is of a lesser magnitude and to the west is considerably higher at 3,500 per hour. There is a similar volume of traffic travelling around Hammersmith Gyratory which shows a similar increase over current flow. As the A4 travels into central London traffic flow generally decreases, which is representative of a radial traffic corridor. Likewise as the A4 travels out of central London, traffic flow increases.
As the A4 passes through Hounslow, Hammersmith & Fulham and Kensington and Chelsea it has junctions with a number of side roads. Vehicles both join and leave the A4 to continue their journeys. over the length of option 3 (Sutton Court Road to earl’s Court) more than half of the traffic travelling east leaves the A4. A similar profile is found travelling westbound with traffic doubling in volume over the same stretch.
This is a fundamental finding as traffic that joins the A4 between the start and end points of a tunnel between Chiswick and Earl’s Court will have to use a surface network. Should the flyover be removed, it would be diverted around the Hammersmith Gyratory.
The short tunnel is determined to have no impact on traffic flow as it is a straight replacement of the
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 3 7
flyover with a tunnel. All traffic that currently uses the flyover could use the tunnel and traffic leaving or joining the A4 via Hammersmith Gyratory would do so as it does currently. Traffic flow around the gyratory would be unaffected.
Both longer tunnels would require a surface road network to cater for up to 50 per cent of the current A4 flow. option 2 would allow slightly more traffic to join and leave a long tunnel alignment, and hence a slightly higher percentage of traffic would use the tunnel than would be the case for the longer option 3. This could allow for a narrowing of the A4. However, if the flyover were to be removed (this being the primary objective of this study), this traffic would be diverted through the Hammersmith Gyratory. Any capacity increases that can be achieved at the Hammersmith Gyratory, even if possible, would not be consistent with the vision for the improved town centre.
Given the importance of the Hammersmith Gyratory, an additional tunnel scoping exercise was undertaken to see how traffic flow could be reduced. The main north-south route from Shepherds Bush Road to Fulham Palace Road was considered as an additional route for a tunnel. It was found that, again, this could feasibly be constructed - but not without significant environmental and economic impacts. In addition, basic traffic analysis was undertaken and found
Hammersmith Flyover traffic origin and destination.
3 8 HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study
that the beneficial impact on traffic flow around the gyratory would not be sufficient to reallocate capacity.
Further analysis of the operation of the gyratory would need to be undertaken to support both the regeneration of the town centre and any A4 tunnel solution.
The longer the tunnel, the less likely traffic would be to use it. If a tunnel only served a proportion of the corridor movement the remaining movement would be redistributed onto the surface network which would need sufficient capacity to function effectively.
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 3 9
The public support for the flyunder is very much driven by the opportunity to rebuild public access across Hammersmith Broadway, and to reunite Hammersmith with the river. Relinking the centre, north-south, and east-west routes are also consistent with the Mayor of London’s Roads Task Force criteria for the future of strategic road improvements.
In the most ambitious scenarios not only would the flyover be removed, but the road would also be removed from the western side of the gyratory with the eastern side reverting to two-way working. This is dependent on finding an answer to addressing the traffic flow through the gyratory.
The economic opportunity for redevelopment is dealt with in detail in the masterplan (published alongside this feasibility report) and summarised later in this chapter.
operational beneFits a re-imaGined hammersmith town centre
But there is much public interest in the benefits of new green spaces and new pedestrian access corridors linking the town centre’s key cultural buildings. A new town green would be created to the west of St Paul’s Church. This would also be the focal point of a new walkway linking the Lyric Theatre to the north, and the eventim Apollo, and on to the river to the south.
It could be possible to increase the size of Furnivall Gardens, but most importantly create a landscaped pedestrian route from there to the town centre and new civic campus (the redeveloped town hall and adjacent site).
The commercial campus created around the Ark and possible portal location would start a long stretch of green space along the current flyover alignment, conceptually known as Riverline Park.
There are two areas of public benefit arising from the work proposed for the flyunder and the gyratory and a redesigned Hammersmith Town Centre. It would create a significant improvement to the environment, and unlock an economic boost to the land released by demolishing the flyover, and that surrounding it.
Illustrative view looking west along King Street.
4 0 HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study
siGniFicant enVironmental improVement
Another major public interest was improved noise and air quality issues in the central Hammersmith area. The Hammersmith BID (a not-for-profit organisation representing the interests of local business in the central Hammersmith area) has produced a Strategic Impact Assessment published alongside this study and covers these elements in greater detail.
Their report compares a tunnel carrying the traffic underground (almost silently) through the centre of Hammersmith with the current 90,000 vehicles per day, noting that a car travelling at 65mph at a distance of 25ft generates 77dB of noise - well above what is considered loud by many people.
They also note that Government targets for nitrogen dioxide have been missed at
Hammersmith Broadway for five years, with traffic on the flyover being a large contributor to this excess. While the tunnel would significantly improve the air quality in the town centre, the air quality implications around the tunnel portals would need to be investigated further. However, with adequate tunnel ventilation and existing technology, much can be done to mitigate these impacts.
The BID also sees the redevelopment of the town centre allowing for walking and cycling to be more of a choice for residents and workers in the area. This would allow for a significantly improved journey quality and is consistent with current local, regional and national transport and planning policies.
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 4 1
While it was not in the remit of this study to model the wider economic benefits of a flyunder, it is clear that the creation of thousands of badly needed new residential units will add economic dynamism to the town centre. It is easy to imagine that the new pedestrian access to established cultural landmarks is likely to attract an improved café and small restaurant offering. The removal of the flyover and the increased amount of public space must lift the value of the town centre and the adjoining areas.
The BID cites many examples of tunnel building or public realm improvements which foster a positive economic effect for their area. Tunnelling the A3 at Hindhead was cited by Knight Frank as a reason for a dramatic lift in the demand and price of houses in the area. Major improvements to the centre of Sheffield and its public spaces delivered an increased footfall of visitors, additional spending per visit, and increase in leisure-related spending, rental uplift and improved yield.
the waVe eFFect
4 1 HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study
Illustrative view looking east of re-imagined St. Paul’s Green.
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 4 3
introductionThis Feasibility Study is supported by a Masterplan and Development Value Study, which is published alongside this report. The purpose of the study was:
1. To provide an illustrative masterplan, indicating how development could be brought forward on the land freed up by the A4 and flyover.
2. To generate an indicative floorspace from the masterplan to assess the potential value from redevelopment that could go towards funding the A4 tunnel.
masterplanThe masterplan section of the study looks at approximately 14 hectares of land between Hogarth Roundabout in the west and Baron’s Court Road in the east. Between Baron’s Court Road and North end Road, the existing properties sit close to the A4, dramatically reducing the development potential and further east, Capital and Counties (Capco), have approval for a masterplan for the land which includes land up to the edge of the current A4. It is envisaged that any land freed up here could not provide any additional development potential. For these
FUNDING
reasons, the land to the east of Baron’s Court Road has not been included within the illustrative masterplan.
The illustrative masterplan is informed by a number of overarching principles:
• optimise development. The illustrative masterplan, as well as showing development on land freed up by the removal of the A4, also shows opportunities to bring forward development on neighbouring parcels of land. This includes Hammersmith Bus Station, part of the southern side of King Street, Landmark House and the West London Magistrates Court.
• Reconnect Hammersmith Town Centre to the River Thames. This could be facilitated by reconnecting the streets severed by the original construction of the A4 and through improvements to the public realm around Hammersmith Town Centre.
• Provide a new series of public and civic spaces connecting the south side of King Street, to St. Paul’s Green, the Hammersmith Apollo, Furnivall Gardens and the River Thames. Critical to achieving this aspiration would be the design and landscaping of the connecting street between St. Paul’s Green and Furnivall Gardens.
• Respect the form and scale of adjacent buildings. Where Victorian streets have been severed by the A4, the aspiration is that redevelopment should re-knit together these streets through design that is sensitive to the scale, massing and architecture of adjacent properties.
• Respect heritage assets. This is particularly the case for the Grade II* listed St. Paul’s Church, St. Peter’s Church and Hammersmith Apollo. Development adjacent to these buildings has been set back in order to give these structures prominence. It is proposed that the Hop Holes public house is retained when creating a new pedestrian connection between Lyric Square and St. Paul’s Green.
The illustrative masterplan shows that redevelopment could generate approximately 350,000sqm of development floorspace. In addition, Hammersmith could be reconnected to the River Thames and Furnivall Gardens. St. Paul’s Green could be expanded and enhanced and a new pedestrian and cycle-friendly boulevard could be created, connecting the two green spaces. Streets that were severed by the original construction of the A4 could be re-linked together, and almost 3,000 new homes could be delivered through redevelopment and new retail, leisure and community facilities could be provided.
masterplan and deVelopment Value
West London Link Design in association with the Halcrow Group and Hammersmith BID
A TUNNEL TO REPLACE THE HAMMERSMITH FLYOVER: A CHAIN OF OPPORTUNITIES
Currently the traffic isolates Hammersmith Broadway from the town centre. The bus station occupies a prime site.
Our scheme would allow local traffic to be re-routed away from the Broadway. This would reunite the Broadway with the rest of the town centre
The proposals present the opportunity to build a new covered bus station on Butterwick Road and create a new mixed use development on the current bus station site.
BROADWAY AND THE BUS STATION: MIXED USE HUB
Proposed View of the Bus Station
Current View
CHISWICK
HAMMERSMITH
EARLS COURT
CHISWICK HAMMERSMITH EARL’S COURT
lBHf/tfl freehold lBHf/tfl part-freehold part-private land Private land
4 4 HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study
development ValueThe development value section of the study takes the floorspace generated from the illustrative masterplan and tests what value could be generated from redevelopment and how this could help to finance the tunnelling of the A4. The illustrative masterplan covers both public and private land. For the private land, Section 106 receipts, Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) receipts, council tax, business rates and New Homes Bonus are all considered as mechanisms for accessing finance for the tunnel. For the public land, three scenarios for developing the land are investigated:
1. A 50/50 joint venture. In this scenario, the public sector land is developed in partnership between the public sector and a private developer and profits are shared equally between both parties.
2. A 25/75 joint venture. This is the same as the first scenario but with a greater weighting of profits to the private developer. This option recognises the complexity of accessing finance for a project of this size, which might preclude the viability and deliverability of Scenario 1.
3. Sell the land. This scenario assumes that the public sector sell the land to a private developer. This option has the lowest risk but would not provide as great a return as Scenarios 1 and 2.
The development value study is also split between the feasibility options. option 1 only looks at the development potential from Baron’s Court Road in the east to the eastern edge of Furnivall Gardens in the west, whereas options 2 and 3 look at the entire illustrative masterplan.
tunnel option initial deVelopment appraisal - based on options 2 and 3
1 (cut and coVer short lenGth tunnel)
2 (deep bore medium lenGth tunnel)
3 deep bore medium lenGth tunnel
Element/scenario - Development Vehicle
H&F Development Joint Venture Joint Venture Joint Venture
Public Residential Units 2,187 788 1,484 1,484
Private Residential Units 2,653 1,306 1,306 1,306
Total Residential units 4,840 2,094 2,790 2,790
Public Commercial Floorspace 0 (Not Assumed) 30,000 30,000 30,000
Private Commercial Floorspace 0 (Not Assumed) 76,400 76,400 76,400
Total Commercial Floor Space SQM
0 106,400 106,400 106,400
Financial Appraisal £m £m £m £m
Public Development Receipt 1,000 250 454 454
Private Development Receipt 125 23 23 23
Other Receipts 0 51 52 52
Total Development Receipts 1,125 323 528 528
less
Tunnel cost range (30% - 45% contingency)
1,297-1,446 218-251 1,210 * 1,297 *
Net Benefit/Cost -172 to -321 72 -105 -682 -769
All assumptions in this table are based upon a 50% Joint Venture scenario* These sums are based on the Halcrow 30% contingency only
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 4 5
Option 1For option 1 (short cut-and-cover tunnel), the illustrative masterplan shows that redevelopment could create approximately 2,000 residential units and 106,000sqm of commercial floorspace. The table below indicates the sort of returns that development in this option could deliver. Development of the public land within a 50/50 joint venture would offer the greatest returns and could finance 129 per cent of the tunnel’s costs.
Options 2 and 3options 2 and 3 are for a deep bore tunnel from Sutton Court Road (Chiswick, London Borough of Hounslow) to North end Road (option 2) or a tunnel from Sutton Court Road (Chiswick, London Borough of Hounslow) to earl’s Court Road (option 3). For both options, the illustrative masterplan shows that redevelop could deliver approximately 2,800 residential units and 106,000sqm of commercial floorspace. The table below indicates the sort of returns that development in these options could deliver. Development of the public land within a 50/50 joint venture would offer the greatest returns. For option 2 it could finance 44 per cent of the tunnel’s costs. For option 3 it could finance 41 per cent of the tunnel’s costs.
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 4 7
To establish, at a preliminary level, the aspirations and any concerns of local residents and businesses.
extensive local engagement revealed a high level of support from both local residents and businesses for a flyunder. Aspirations ranged from a simple flyover replacement to a longer tunnel linking Chiswick to earls Court. A number of concerns were raised including cost, construction disruption and traffic redistribution.
To establish current traffic patterns to best understand this route in its wider traffic network context. This will mean liaising with other local traffic authorities in adjoining boroughs and with TfL.
Traffic counts and traffic modelling outputs were provided by TfL which helped to establish the fundamental finding of the project in that there is a high level of traffic dispersion along the A4 corridor between Chiswick and earl’s Court.
To establish the best available information including projections for future traffic volumes which are relevant to a new structure.
Traffic modelling data for 2031 was analysed to advise the size of the tunnel options tested, which showed an increase in traffic flow across the A4 corridor. This is despite traffic volumes in London decreasing over the last 10 years.
To establish the best available information including future projections of the cost of maintaining the current flyover structure over a suitably long period.
The current round of flyover repairs are costing £60m and have been reported to provide a number of decades worth of use to the flyover. This along with the multimillion pound emergency repairs in 2011 have been the only major maintenance expenditure on this structure during its 60-year existence. To rebuild the flyover, should it be necessary, would be likely to cost hundreds of millions of pounds.
SUMMARY
This feasibility study was carried out in order to illustrate the council’s ambition to replace Hammersmith flyover with a tunnel. The study terms of reference below recognise that as a local authority there were limits to what could be achieved with a study of this nature and that further work would be required by those best suited to undertake them, namely Transport for London.
Feasibility proJect terms oF reFerence
4 8 HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study
To establish very approximate costs for various tunnel options, noting the variables which will affect confidence in such estimates.
Construction costs, based on today’s prices and feasibility stage estimations, reveal that a short cut-and-cover tunnel would cost approximately £250m (+/- 50 per cent) to build, and a longer bored tunnel construction would cost £1.2bn. The addition of junctions could add £500m to the longer tunnel estimate.
To review options for meeting the construction costs including, but not limited to:
• Future maintenance liability funding for the existing flyover redeployed
• Capital funding from TfL
• Capital funding from local councils
• Captured value from developable land released
• The possibility of modest user charges to contribute to any gap funding.
At this feasibility stage only limited work has been undertaken on a financing package. Captured
land value can raise £1bn and TfL maintenance liability has been assumed to be broadly similar for a tunnel as it is for the flyover. Given the scale of investment, a public-private arrangement is likely to be the most viable option. User charges were explored and other examples suggest that this would not be compatible with the project objectives by reducing the amount of traffic that would use the tunnel.
To report at interim stage by March 2014:
• On local aspirations and concerns
• On broad route options
• On whether the tunnel must have junctions with other routes
• On the preliminary views of neighbouring councils
• On the geo-technical feasibility of a tunnel (analysing other underground uses).
This report is one of three documents covering the above requirements. The second is a masterplan report and the third is a geo-technical report produced by Halcrow.
To consider options for a replacement tunnel, considering the length, depth, width and start and end points, liaising with adjoining boroughs as appropriate. In particular to examine the implications of a flyunder with or without junctions to north-south routes.
Three tunnel options were tested, a short option and two variations of a long option. The longer the tunnel, the more environmental and economic issues would have to be overcome. Junctions to north-south routes exacerbated these economic and environmental factors.
To consider the nature, extent and potential value of any released surface land, considering existing planning policies and any potential threat from varied planning policies.
The land released was found to be located mostly in Hammersmith town centre. It was determined that to achieve the full re-creation of the town centre both the gyratory and flyover need to be removed. estimations suggest that the value released from the blend of public and private land in the town centre could raise £1bn.
HammersmitH Flyunder Feasib il ity study 4 9
No matter how many expensive repairs are conducted, the flyover won’t last forever. over the next 20 years London will continue to grow with more jobs being created and houses built. Whether or not this results in significant increases in traffic on our road network is unclear. What is clear is that a plan for the future of the A4 corridor is required and that tunnelling under Hammersmith is possible. The council has taken the initiative in producing this feasibility report and now is the time for others to take this investigation forward. There are some significant environmental and economic challenges to overcome. However, as we have seen, the resulting reimagination of Hammersmith town centre could be momentous.
CoNCLUSIoNS
If you would like any part of this document produced in large print or Braille please call 020 8753 3069
© By:design - March 2014. By:design 020 8753 3926 Ref:16_13ccPrinted by Hammerprint 020 8753 2235